•for the foi^itSagtif a-jfolkge. in this Colon.fi' \ °YiL_\Mmmrm,%_Y_m* ¦ ILHIBlBiSLISy • Gift of *^yxdsu\Ay 27 PATERNOSTER ROW 1903 Sutler 6" Tanner The Selviood Printing Works Frome and London EDITOR'S PREFACE Though I am named as the Editor of the present edition of the late Rev. Wm. Arthur's The Pope, the Kings, and the People, it is right to say that, by a restriction of my own choosing — for the publishers were good enough to leave me a considerable discretion, — my editorial care has been limited to the work of abridgment.1 It was clear from the first that in the short time at my disposal no attempt could be made to verify the multitude of Mr. Arthur's references and quotations, drawn as they were with a lavish hand from the contemporary literature of half Europe. Happily, all his readers must recognise how intelligent, laborious and scrupulous he has been. On the other hand, I had hoped to add a certain number of footnotes explanatory of allusions to events and circum stances that are much less fresh in the public memory to-day than they were twenty-six years ago. I should also greatly have liked to point out the extent, sometimes remarkable, to which Mr. Arthur's forecasts have been already verified. But I soon found that if I were to introduce fresh matter it must be at the expense of portions of the original edition that were not to be lightly discarded. I have therefore directed my efforts to adapting the book as far as possible to the require ments of the present time by the process of simple retrench ment. 1 Considerably more than a fifth of the original matter has been omitted. Whenever a quotation has been abridged, the usual marks have been employed to indicate the hiatus. -vi EDITOR'S PREFACE This process I have carried out most scrupulously. Every word in the abridgment is Mr. Arthur's own, and in Mr. Arthur's order. I have not even allowed myself to supply insignificant connecting words, however convenient they might have been, or however plainly they might be implied in the original work. This rule has entailed extra labour, but the gain seems to me immense. Every reader of this abridgment may know that he is reading Mr. Arthur's ipsissima verba, and that he may safely quote them as such. Not one word is mine. And here I may perhaps be allowed to express my opinion that Mr. Arthur's words deserve to be very widely read and quoted. It would be hard to find a book that would shed more light on many of the most urgent questions of to-day. As an annus mirabilis of history, 1870 may yet take its place with 1453 or 1789. It was the year in which the Jesuits signal ized the triumphant consummation of a struggle, waged during more than three centuries, for the capture of the Papacy. It was the year in which the new Vaticanism was formally consti tuted, and in which it gave the world notice, plainly and osten tatiously, of the policy to which it held itself committed. It was also the year of the Franco-Prussian war, a mighty convul sion which was after all but an incident in the great drama of Vaticanism, as Mr. Arthur, amongst others, has clearly shown. I have said elsewhere that " the Jesuits, who brought France to the verge of ruin in 1870, seemed on the very point of com pleting their work of destruction a year or two since ; and [that] he would be a very bold man who would dare to say that the peril had passed even yet.1 The writer who makes such a statement assumes a grave responsibility ; but if any one wishes to know how abundantly the statement can be justified he has only to turn to Mr. Arthur's pages. Mr. Arthur demands 1 The Programme of the Jesuits, Preface, p. v. EDITOR'S PREFACE vii from us no confiding trustfulness. Even at some expense to the flow of his narrative, he wisely made his work a repertory of contemporary documents, either transcribed entire or quoted with great fulness. Without resort to ex parte representations of adversaries, we may thus learn from the Vatican's own organs that clerical education, which has so signally proved itself the bane of modern France, is the very groundwork of Vaticanism. And from the impressive picture of the remorse that embittered Montalembert's last hours as he looked back on the share he had taken long before in shaping the educa tional policy of his country, we may perhaps learn the great lesson of distinguishing between a false liberalism and the true. Never more than in this instance is the history of the past the key to the present ; and no man, unless his acquaintance with Vaticanism is of quite exceptional extent, can rise from the perusal of this book without feeling that he has obtained a momentous and far-reaching addition to his stock of religious and, perhaps even more, of political knowledge. W. BLAIR NEATBY. 'November, 1903. PREFACE THE sources of the information contained in this work are, i. Official documents ; 2. Histories having the sanction of the Pope or of bishops ; 3. Scholastic works of the present pontificate, and of recognized authority ; 4. Periodicals and journals, avowed organs of the Vatican or of its policy, with books and pamphlets by bishops and other Ultramontane writers ; 5. The writings of Liberal Catholics. Of the official documents the greater part have been officially published. The list of authorities, and the references in each particular case, will sufficiently indicate where these are to be found. Besides these, the Documenta ad IUustrandum of Professor Friedrich are a store of documents of special value, both in themselves and as throwing light upon those officially published. They came into his hands as an official theologian at the Vatican Council, and he published them on his own responsibility. The Sammlung of Friedberg is a vast store, combining the documents of the Vatican with those of Courts, public bodies, and important individuals. The official history of Cecconi, now Archbishop of Florence, though professedly that of the Vatican Council, is really occu pied with the secret history of the five years preceding the Council. That very curious narrative throws a light back on the foregoing years, and a light forward upon the Council, by aid of which many things otherwise indistinct become well defined. I have waited in hope that a second volume would appear, but in vain. The eight superb folios of Victor Frond come out with an assurance, under the Pope's own hand, of being preserved by due oversight from error, and with a guarantee of divine patronage. They contain a life of the Pope, x PREFACE biographical notices of the Cardinals and prelates, a full account of ceremonies, authentic portraits of men and vestments, with pictures of " functions," and so contribute to enable one to set events in their frames, and to invest them with their colours. Except military annals, perhaps, no history ever had more colour than this portion of Papal history, and perhaps in no history whatever has the action been more deeply affected by the scenery. The Civiltd Cattolica fulfils the invaluable office of a serial history, in the pages of which official documents and the chronicle of events illustrate one another, and at the same time discussions often prepare the way both for documents and for events, and always follow and elucidate any that are of consequence. The same office is in a less degree also fulfilled by the Stimmen aus Maria Laach. To appreciate the height of authority on which the Civiltd stands, the reader should bear in mind the fact that in 1866,1 after it had already for sixteen years been recognized as the organ, at one and the same time, of the Pope himself and of the Company of Jesus to which its editors belonged, his Holiness in a brief and by a declared exercise of apostolic authority, formally erected in perpetuity the Jesuit Fathers who composed the editorial staff into a College of Writers, which college should be under the General of the Society of Jesus, but, it is added, so " as to Us and to Our successors shall seem most expedient." In this brief the Pontiff recorded, as to the past, the " exceeding gladness of soul " he had felt in witnessing the labour, erudition, zeal, and talent with which the Civiltd had " manfully protected and defended the supreme dignity, authority, power and rights " of the Apostolic See, and had " set forth and propagated the true doctrine." He also recorded the fact that all this had day by day more and more merited the "goodwill, esteem and praise," not only of the hierarchy, but of men of the greatest eminence, and of all the good. This, coming at a time when the expositions of the Encyclical and Syllabus given by the Civiltd had awakened among Liberal Catholics serious oppo- 1 See Civiltd, Serie VI. vol. vi. pp. 5-15. PREFACE xi sition and even alarm, was decisive as to what was, at Rome, held to be the true doctrine, and as to who were held to be its real teachers. As to the future, the Pontiff, adopting the well known motto of the Company of Jesus, decreed that, for the greater glory of God, the writers should, as we have said, constitute in perpetuity a college possessing peculiar rights and privileges. As if formally to claim some share of this glory, the Jesuit editors of the Stimmen aus Maria Laach, when in 1869 commencing a new series, notified on their title- page the fact that they availed themselves of the labours of the Civiltd — a liberty which no Jesuit durst have taken without the highest sanction. All the numbers of the Civiltd and of the Stimmen being under my hand, they have yielded a steady light by which to examine opinions relating to the movement of " reconstruc tion," whether those opinions were hostile cr sympathetic. The Italian journal, the Unitd Cattolica, and the French one, the Univers, written with a consciousness of the highest favour on the one hand and of an overwhelming influence among the clergy on the other, comment upon the operative clauses of official documents — generally intelligible only to the initiated — in forms more popular than those of the two great magazines. But it is only by the still clearer comment of daily narratives and polemics that the elucidation becomes complete. The Roman work of the Marchese Francesco Vitelleschi (Pomponio Leto) has now appeared in English — Eight Months at Rome (Murray). This is welcome, as enabling one to refer the English reader to his pages, of which even Ultramontanes in Rome do not impugn the accuracy. Quirinus is also happily in English. Professor Friedrich's Tagebuch ought to be, but is not. Those and smaller works by Liberal Catholics, com pared with the sparkling volumes of M. Louis Veuillot and the Ultramontane serials and pamphlets, and with the Old Catholic writers in the Rheinischer Merkur, the Literaturblatt of Bonn, the Stimmen aus der Katholischen Kirche, and so forth, slowly bring home to our English understanding the strange principles and wonderful projects which at first we either fail to appre- xii PREFACE hend, or else imagine that they cannot be seriously entertained. On those principles and projects four distinct controversies have shed a steadily increasing light — the controversy on, I. The Syllabus ; 2. The Vatican CouncU ; 3. The Old Catholic Movement ; 4. The Falk Laws. The last two do not come within the scope of this work, but very much of the light by which we gradually come to understand the preceding stages of the movement, is due to the keen discussions to which these two controversies have given rise. Having subscribed for the Civiltd Cattolica for years before the Syllabus appeared, I was not wholly unprepared for the controversy which followed. The Civiltd also enabled me to see how Liberal Catholics connected the Vatican Council with a movement in the past, dating from the Pope's restoration, and with a plan of vast changes for the future. While the hopes of the Ultramontanes seemed visionary, and the fears of the Liberal Catholics seemed exaggerated, it did nevertheless appear possible that great events might, come out of a deliberate attempt, made by a large and organized force, to reconstruct the world. Soon after the close of the Franco-German war, a visit to Paris, Munich, Vienna, Berlin, Brussels, and other centres, supplied me with much material, casting light on the enterprise in which the Vatican Council was the legislative episode, and from which the Old Catholic movement was the recoil. It was while engaged in studying such material that I threw off the translation of the discussion held in Rome on the question whether St. Peter had ever visited that city. Soon after broke out the controversy on the Falk Laws. Six weeks spent in a German country town, reading journals and pamph lets, and also in collecting, added to my light, and to the means of getting further light. In the course of the time employed upon the study of growing material was thrown off the review of the Pope's Speeches, under the title of The Modem Jove. Though conscious that I had not yet the groundwork for a well connected account of the whole movement, I began to write, not with any intention of publishing for a long time, PREFACE xm should I live, but under the feeling that, should I be called away, it would be right to leave behind me information which had not been gained without cost and labour. After a while appeared the official history of Cecconi. His authentic if in complete disclosure of the secret proceedings of five years was a stem for many hitherto perplexing branches. A plan now began to shape itself, and I commenced to recast all I had done. Shortly afterwards came out the great work of Theiner, the Acta Genuina of the Council of Trent. This settled many points keenly debated between Catholic and Liberal Catholic, affecting the rights of kings, of bishops, of the divinity schools, of the lower clergy, of the laity, and affecting the relations of all these to the Pontiff. While I was working with these additional helps appeared Mr. Gladstone's Expostulation. The great amount of know ledge it betrayed contrasted with one's previous idea of the state of information on the subject among our public men. The controversy which followed might have brought some tempta tion to haste, had it not also brought proof that it was even more necessary than I had supposed to beware of assuming that phrases, modes of conception, and projects, well understood in Italy or Germany, were at all understood here. Some of those who reviewed Mr. Gladstone took for strange what in all countries in the south or centre of Europe would have been taken as familiar, and for doubtful what in Rome or Munich was as clear as day. Accredited terms and phrases were treated as inventions ; by some as inventions of genius, by others of animosity. It was often more than hinted that prin ciples and designs habitually proclaimed at the Vatican were ascribed to priests only by opponents. Not unfrequently a gentleman would seem to think it more generous to attribute his Protestant ideas to Ultramohtanes, than to take it for granted that they preferred their own. It was incredible how political questions pregnant with future controversies, perhaps With future wars, were evaded as theology ! The replies to Mr. Gladstone placed the ignorance of the Enghsh public on the subject in a different but a very impres- vol. i. b xiv PREFACE sive light. It is often said abroad, by those who know us, that no nation in Europe is so liable as we are to treat gravely statements from priests or their advocates which any reason able amount of information would render entertaining. The reviews of these replies showed a growing sense of the interests involved, but intensified one's feeling that the elements of clear understanding were wanting. Men did not know the terms, the facts, the publications, or the pohtical doctrines of the movements under discussion. Had what has been written in our best journals during the last twenty years from Italy, or even during the last five from Rome and Berlin, been well read, it would have led to study, and in that case Dr. Newman and others would not have had so cheap a laugh at our ignor ance of what is meant because of our false interpretation of what is said. While this controversy proceeded, a stay of nearly three months in Rome, employed in seeking material and information, added considerably to my stores, which were further increased by two subsequent visits to Munich and one to Bonn. I have often been reminded of an incident which occurred in Rome. One of our celebrated scholars, hearing what I was engaged in, exclaimed " Oh, Theology ! " Of course, he was fresh from home. Not many minutes before, a resident diplo matist, in whose house this took place, having heard me say " I began the study of this subject as a religious question, but — " smiled and said, " Yes, but — you find it is all politics, and the further you get into it the more purely political will you find it." The controversy which had sprung up at home showed that a book written as this one had been begun would be frequently misunderstood. In that controversy it was often taken for granted that when an Ultramontane disclaims Temporal Power, he disclaims power over temporal things ; and that when he writes Spiritual Power, he means only power over spiritual things ; that when he writes Religious Liberty, he means freedom for every one to worship God according to his conscience ; that when he writes the Divine Law, he means PREFACE xv only the Ten Commandments and the precepts of the Gospel ; that when he writes the Kingdom of God, he means righteous ness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost ; and that when he writes the Word of God, he simply means the Bible. One reasoning with false interpretations like these in his mind must reason in such a fog as Dr. Newman, in his letter to the Duke of Norfolk, cleverly depicts. Ambiguity similar to that now indicated prevails over the whole field of phraseology — theo logical, political, and educational. English Ultramontanes are doubtless in part responsible for these misapprehensions, but only in part. If their writings are studied, they will be seen to use such terms differently from their fellow-country men. But certainly the Papal Press of Rome, and even that of France, is not in any degree responsible for our illusions, but has, on the contrary, left us without excuse. The consequence of all this is that in this book, where a mere allusion would have been made, a fact is now often related ; where the sense of some particular utterance would have been condensed, that utterance is verbally recited ; and where one sentence would have been culled out, more are given. Very often, where a statement of the principles of the Papal move ment would have been accompanied only by a reference to a contemporary authority, that authority is made to speak for himself, and occasionally at some length. Terms and phrases, which might have been left to the chance of being understood, are either coupled with narratives or discussions, to bring out their sense, or else they are explained. When I do give explan ations, let me not be trusted, but watched. Much will be found of the language both of Catholics and of Liberal Catholics, and with it the reader can confront my strange-looking explana tions. In the end he will be able to do what, thank God, every Englishman is inclined to do — form an opinion for himself as to the real sense in which the speakers employed their own words. It need not be said that this change of method rendered necessary a larger book than was at first planned. It was also unfavourable to the flow and unity of the narrative. Perhaps it compensated for that disadvantage by more fully showing the XVI PREFACE grounds on which statements are made, and by bringing the reader frequently, almost continuously, into communication with Italian, Frenchman or German, each expressing his own views, whether those of statesman or priest, of journalist or magistrate, of Catholic or of Liberal Catholic. My thanks are due to many who have forwarded my re searches. The kindness of Count Cadorna, then Italian Minister at our Court, procured for me valuable facilities in Rome. My true gratitude was deserved by the distinguished Minister of Education, Signor Bonghi, especially for his per sonal introduction of me to the great library of the Collegio Romano, not then open to the public. Our own Ambassador, Sir Augustus Paget, and the German Ambassador, Baron Keudell, both rendered me real service, with all possible courtesy. The Marchese Francesco Nobili-Vitelleschi, himself author of a history on which I must often draw, took pains to procure for me valuable material. Among many benefits received from our own countrymen, I must specify that derived from the vast information on all Italian matters possessed by Mr. Montgomery Stuart, and also that arising from the con stant kindness of the Rev. H. J. Piggott. Those two gentle men have kindly read on the spot certain sheets containing local observations. Two German scholars were constant and practical friends, Dr. Benrath and Dr. Richter. In Munich the National Library, with its clear catalogue and good collection, contrasted with the great libraries of Rome. The kindness of Dr. Dollinger was great and eminently prac tical. He had kept all pamphlets, bearing on the subj ect, which had come into his hands. He not only gave me free access to this collection, but, where he had duplicates, presented me with them. Dr. Reusch, Professor of the University of Bonn, with a collection at least equal, though without duplicates, gave me similar facilities. The lists thus procured, and the energy of the German booksellers, enabled me to get almost everything contained in either collection, including Italian and Latin publications which I had in vain sought in Italy, and even French ones which I could not find in Paris. PREFACE xvn The weakness of my own eyesight has increased the obliga tion which, in any case, I should have felt to my two valued friends, Dr. Moulton and Dr. H. W. Williams, who have kindly read the proofs. Dr. Moulton also compared the translation of the speech of Darboy with the original, and suggested improvements. Dr. Karl Benrath, of Bonn, whose long resi dence in Rome and whose study of the subject lent to his judgment a special value, has laid me under great obligation by examining every sheet as it passed through the press. The very frequent translations rendered necessary by the plan of letting men speak for themselves are as close as I knew how to make them. Even where marks of quotation are not used, and yet I profess tp give the sense of some utterance, those who can go to the originals will find that the language, though condensed, is preserved, and, in any important matter, closely rendered. Reversing the ordinary practice as to quotations, where the italics were in the original, I generally mention that it was so. It would have been tedious to say that they were my own in every case where they seemed necessary to direct attention to a phrase or a term having a meaning different from ours, or to one the full significance of which might easily escape notice. Nothing but a conviction that the movement here traced is of an importance for which ordinary terms are not an adequate expression would have justified me, in my own view, in giving to the study of it years of a life now far advanced. If the authors of the movement are not deceived, the generations that will come up after I am no more will witness a struggle on the widest scale, and of very long duration, during which will dis appear all that to us is known as modern liberties, all that to Rome is known as the Modern State, and at the close of which the ecclesiastical power will stand alone, presiding over the destinies of a reconstituted world. Not at all believing in the possibility of this issue, I do not disbelieve in the possibility of the struggle. To avert any such repetition of past horrors, to turn the war into a war of thought, a war with the sword of the writer and of the orator, instead of that of the zouave and xviii PREFACE the dragoon, is an object in attempting to serve which, how ever humbly, a good man might be content to die. Had I at any time during my preparations seen the same work under taken by some one whose position or whose name would have commanded a degree of attention to which I have no claim, gladly should I have buried the fruit of my labour. Such as that fruit is, I now submit it to the public, in humble hope that the very absence of titles to consideration by which a work on the subject should have been recommended, will turn to a plea for more indulgence in weighing the only claims I have to put forth, those of hard work and honest intention. May He who has given to our nation the blessings of free prayer, free preaching, free writing, free speech, and free assembly, with their wholesome fruit of equal laws, tempered power, and moderated liberty, grant that this humble labour may in some measure contribute to make those inestimable boons dearer than ever to the hearts of our people, and that it may contribute also to place them in a position more readily to foil every endeavour to snatch those boons or to steal them away from us and from mankind ! Clapham_ Common, 1877. POSTSCRIPT TO THE PREFACE June 6, 1877 ON CARDINAL MANNING'S " TRUE STORY OF THE VATICAN COUNCIL" Had not the time occupied in bringing out this work far exceeded my expectations, it would have appeared as early as the first portion of Cardinal Manning's " True Story of the Vatican Council," in the pages of the Nineteenth Century. As it is, I have been able to read the fourth paper, in which the Cardinal concludes his narrative of the Council itself, though he intimates an intention of hereafter adding comments on extraneous matters. I cannot but feel that, in more respects than one, the appearance of the True Story immediately before that of this book is an advantage. The general reader is thus supplied with means of checking many of my statements, and of estimating the value of my authorities. Although this advantage is limited to such ground as is common to the True Story and to my history, that ground is a portion of sufiicient importance to afford some criterion for judging of the whole. One of my fears, arising from the way in which, both in recent controversies and in former ones, authorities have been dealt with before the English public, was that we might find it soberly intimated that Cecconi was not a writer of high credit, that the Civiltd Cattolica was a private magazine, that the Acta Genuina of Theiner was a publication brought out in an obscure place, and so on through the list. Now, however, the reliance placed by Cardinal Manning on author ities which supply essential features of my narrative, and the xx POSTSCRIPT TO THE PREFACE importance unwillingly assigned by him to others frequently cited by me, will act as a restraint on those who might have made light of them. Another considerable advantage is this. It almost seemed as if it would prejudice Englishmen against a writer to state what from time to time it was needful to intimate— how his tories issued from official or semi-official sources systematically withheld information on the points of chief importance. Such points, so far as the Council was concerned, were the actual differences of opinion between prelate and prelate, the tenor of the debates, the arguments employed on one side or the other, the written memoranda of bishops on the questions disputed, their printed pamphlets, their speeches, their truly important petitions, recording complaints against the Rules of Procedure imposed upon them, and against the disabilities under which the Pope had placed them. Those petitions recorded, further, their personal disbelief in the new dogma, with the fact that they had always taught in opposition to it, and that they anticipated from its adoption grave perils of collision between Church and State. Other matters kept out of view comprised interesting facts credibly alleged and circum stantially detailed relating to personal acts of the Pope, to proceedings of the Curia and of the Presidents of the Council. Still more interesting, and of graver import, were the reasons assigned by Ministers of State and others, for regarding with more than ordinary jealousy the projected changes in the Papal system. It seemed even more invidious to note the practice of adopting, in order to cover all these suppressions of facts, and of alleged facts, an air of giving information by entering into details of ceremonies, enlarging on unimportant matters, telling, as if it was of great moment, how many meetings of this sort were held, how many of that, how many spoke, at what time this Decree was proposed, and how many votes were taken on another, without in all this allowing a word to transpire of what was said or thought. I am now relieved of all fear about those features of my narrative. Any one who has a relish for the curiosities of literature may match, and perhaps POSTSCRIPT TO THE PREFACE xxi overmatch, what I have told of French priests and Italian Jesuits, by what an Englishman has done. I had never, however, to accuse the Italian Jesuits of keeping out of sight the political, or, as they generally say, the social aspects of the movement, and of covering them up in theo logical disquisitions. They did, indeed, use wondrous theo logical phrases with political meanings, but any one who studied their writings soon penetrated that veil. They also invariably used theology as the motive power of all their politics. But from 1850, when the movement which has characterized the present pontificate began, to 1870, when it reached its legis lative climax, they set forth prominently as their object the j reconstruction of society, on the model of what, in their own dialect, they call the Christian civilization. They loudly proclaimed, as the elements of that Christian civilization, the revocation of constitutions, the abolition of modern liberties, especially those of the Press and of worship, with the subjection to canon law of civil law, and, above all, the subjection to the jurisdiction of the Pope of all nations and their rulers, whatever the title of those rulers might be. They justly conceived the ills they had to repair, as, having begun with the bad teach ing of John Wyclif, in which his doctrine of " dominion " was the -head and front of all his offending, and of that of every succeeding age. As he had striven for the emancipation of kings from the Pope, of legislatures from the ecclesiastical powers, and of the individual from the priest, so did they set themselves to bring back again the dominion of the priest over the individual, the dominion of the ecclesiastical authorities ; over lawgivers, and above all, the dominion of the Pope over. kings. Of this the reader will meet with evidence from their ! own lips, at almost every stage of our narrative. Those Italian Jesuits did not expound the Syllabus, according to the new and naive notion of Cardinal Manning, as a code containing very little to which " any sincere believer in Christian revela tion would, if he understood the Syllabus, object. The Italian , Jesuits, ay, and even the German ones, on the contrary, made a boast of its diametrical opposition to every form of xxii POSTSCRIPT TO THE PREFACE (Liberalism, and in particular to Liberal Catholicism, of its efficacy as an instrument for overturning the Modern State, and of its solidity as the foundation-stone on which was to be reared the fabric of reconstructed society. In all their writings society was taken as meaning, not families, nor Churches, but nations, and each one of the nations was to form a province within a Church ruling over it and over all other nations in every one of their laws and public institutions. In speaking of the idea that all believers in revelation would accept nearly all of the Syllabus, I have assumed that Cardinal Manning, writing for an English audience, uses the term " Christian revelation " in the English and not in the Papal sense. To a sincere believer in Christian revelation in the Papal sense, the Syllabus, if not in form, yet in substance, is an infallible and " irreformable " portion of that revelation. And so it would very simply come to pass that a sincere be liever in Christian revelation would admit, not merely most of it, but all of it so far as it contains any teaching. And to such a believer the kingdoms of the world will never become the kingdom of God, and of His Christ, but by ceasing to be kingdoms at all in any independent and proper sense, and by merging into provinces under the Priest and King, or, as in phrases still more mystic they style him, the Shepherd-King of the Vatican. Now a True Story of the Vatican Council, in which, to the apprehension of an ordinary reader, all these topics are kept out of view, though to an adept they are not wholly kept out, seems to me like a True Story of the civil war in the United States which should largely dwell upon State rights, forgetting all about slavery, or speaking of it only in an esoteric dialect. The True Story affords us some foretaste of what history is to be after dogma has completed the conquest over it which has been promised. Had my narrative been written after its appearance, the topics totally ignored, and those virtually ignored, in the True Story, might easily have been thrown into stronger relief. As it is, however, the succession of events necessarily brings them again and again into view, and perhaps the effect of the outline may be rendered more distinct to the English reader through the contrast with the True Story. Of the prelates on this side of the Alps, Cardinal Manning was not the one from whom we should have expected that in an account of the five years preceding the Vatican Council, with a brief retrospect of the whole of the present pontificate, and a history of the Council itself, scarcely one clear utterance should be made as to the bearing of the movement on those govern ments, liberties and institutions which to the Vatican are very evil and to us are very dear. It was not so in 1867 and 1869. In both of those years the Cardinal indicated the political relations of the movement in words of warning which, if only echoes of those of the Jesuits in Rome, were perhaps more intelligible and vehement than those of any other prelate on this side of the Alps. Statements of mine will frequently be found to conflict with statements made in the True Story. In most of those cases — I hope in all — the materials from known sources furnished to the general reader will suffice for a not unsatisfactory comparison, while the authorities indicated will enable the scholar to form a judgment. In very many of these cases statements of Car dinal Manning, made in previous works and virtually amounting to the same as the most material of those made in the True Story, will be found side by side with the statements of other authorities, with official documents, or with facts no longer disputable. Of these statements, one to which the Cardinal seems to attach much importance is his assertion that none of the prelates, or at most a number under five, disbelieved or denied the dogma of Papal infallibility, and that all their objections turned on questions of prudence. This is not a slip, nor a hasty assertion, and it is very far from being peculiar to Cardinal Manning. It is now the harmonious refrain of all that hierarchy of strange witnesses of which he has made him self a part. The point is one on which illustrations will occur again and again, in events, in words, and in those documents which, in spite of all precautions, have been gained to pub licity. xxiv POSTSCRIPT TO THE PREFACE Notwithstanding the method adopted in the True Story, the fact crops out at every turn that the modern strife of the Papacy is not to make men and women, as such, godly and peaceable, but to bring kings as kings, and legislatures as legislatures, and nations as nations, into subjection to the Pope. It crops out sufficiently, at least, to be obvious to all who know the differ ence, in the Cardinal's phraseology, between the two sets of terms employed to indicate those two distinct objects. For instance, what an excellent description of that Catholic Civiliza tion which, in the great contest of the Vatican, is ever signalized as the goal, does the Cardinal give when, picturing the " public life and laws and living organization of Christendom " in the times when all these, according to his ideas, were " Christian," he says, " Princes and legislatures and society professed the Catholic faith, and were subject to the head of the Catholic Church." Cardinal Manning does not here use the word " society " in the domestic but in the political sense. He means, not families or social parties, but nations — as the Jesuit writers almost always do. Any one may, therefore, possess himself of a key to the true meaning of many pious phrases which occur in the following pages, if he will first of all clearly realize in his own thoughts just what it would involve for England and for us were the conditions stated by the Cardinal fulfilled by our princes, our legislature, and our " society." One seeking to do this must realize the fact that the prince and the legislature not as individuals, and the " society " not in its separate members, but the prince as a prince, the legislature as a legislature, and the nation as a society, shall profess the Catholic faith. Ordinary Englishmen do not realize all that is meant by that formula. But beyond that, the prince as a prince, the legislature as a legislature, the nation as a society, are not only to believe in the Pope, but to be subject to him. What fulness of meaning that formula possesses will gradually open up to the reader as the narrative unfolds. He will often hear ecclesiastical politicians of the school to which Cardinal Manning belongs, talking in their native dialect, not modu lating their voice to win the are of Protestants. This national POSTSCRIPT TO THE PREFACE xxv profession of the faith, and this subjection of kings, law-givers, and nations to the Pope, constitute in one word the Civiltd Cattolica (the Catholic civilization) ; or, in plain English, the Catholic civil system ; or, in other terms, the true Catholic constitution, the reign of Christ over the world, to establish which in all nations the Vatican is to move heaven and earth. In his first paper Cardinal Manning seeks to impress us with the belief that the raising of Papal infallibility to the rank of a dogma was not a chief object of the Pontiff, much less his only one, in convoking the Vatican Council. On that point the narrative will often incidentally present the expressions of prelates, official writers, and others, so that the reader will be able to form an opinion of his own. In his second paper the Cardinal shows that throughout the whole of the present pon tificate the dogma has been kept in view as an essential object. Of that position illustrations will frequently occur. In the second paper, also, the Cardinal repeats his old allegation that it was Janus who invented " the fable of an acclamation." The course of the tale will tell whether it was or was not Janus who originated the talk of a design to get up an acclamation, and whether that talk was or was not a fable. The Cardinal, while attempting to justify, though for the most part keeping out of sight, the disabilities imposed upon the bishops by the Pope, disabilities of which they loudly com plained, glances at one out of many of the real ones. He says that the Commission which was empowered to say whether any proposal emanating from a bishop was worthy to be re commended to the Pope for consideration, without which recommendation it could not come before the Council, was " a representative commission." The fact is that it was a selection of prelates made by the Pope, who excluded from it all who had avowed themselves opponents of his infallibility, and included in it creatures of his own, who had nothing of the bishop but the orders and the pay which the favour of the Court had given to them. The Cardinal, after ample time for correction, repeats his old declaration that in the Vatican Council " the liberty of speech xxvi POSTSCRIPT TO THE PREFACE was as perfectly secured as in our Parliament." That assertion has the merit of being free from all ambiguity, and moreover is one on which plain men can judge. As I have told the story, the readers will over and over again meet with facts, equally free from ambiguity and equally patent to plain men, which will show whether the assertion is true or not. On the great question of secrecy the Cardinal risks a state ment which exceeds what Italian Jesuits, if writing for a periodical of the rank of the Nineteenth Century, would be likely to hazard. He says : " At the beginning of the Council of Trent this precaution (of secrecy) was omitted ; wherefore, on February 17, 1562, the legates were compelled to impose the secret upon the bishops." The Cardinal would seem to imagine that there was at least a substantial agreement, if not an actual identity, between the acts by which silence was enjoined, and also between the extent of the silence demanded in Trent and at the Vatican ; and that indeed from February 17, 1562, forwards, the Council of Trent was laid under a bond something like that by which the Vatican Council was from the beginning fettered. Was it so ? Was there a substantial agreement in the two acts by which silence was enjoined ? Was there a substantial agreement in the extent of silence imposed ? Was there at Trent a formal decree ? Was there an oath im posed on the officers ? Was there an exclusion of the theologians from debates, and of the public from the debates of the theolo gians ? Was there any vow required, any threat held out ? And does even Cardinal Manning fancy that there was at Trent a new mortal sin made on purpose for the benefit of the bishops ? Of all this there was nothing. The act of the legates was simply what it is described as having been by Massarellus, the Secretary of the Council, who says : " The Fathers were admonished not to divulge things proposed for examination, and in par ticular Decrees, before they were published in open session." *¦ The Cardinal is apparently also under an impression that the extent of silence imposed in the two cases was at least sub stantially the same. Was that so ? Did the legates censure the 1 Theiner, Acta Genuina, i. 686. POSTSCRIPT TO THE ' PREFACE xxvii admission of laymen to hear the theologians argue ? Did they censure the permission given to theologians who were not bishops even by the fiction of a see in partibus, to dispute in presence of the Council ? Did they censure any remarks made out of doors on speeches,1 opinions or projects ? Did they censure anything but the one indiscretion of circulating pro posed Decrees, or other things proposed, while yet the formulae were, " so to speak, unshaped," but were in their inchoate condition made1 public as if they had been passed ? Did the legates suggest that the duty of secrecy extended further than that of not publishing such tentative formulae, of not sending them out of the city, and of forbidding persons attached to the households of bishops to commit those indiscretions ? At Trent there were faults and causes of complaint in no small number. But what Cardinal Manning calls " the secret " which would shut up every mouth as to all subjects pro posed, as to all opinions expressed, as to all speeches made, as to all designs mooted — " the secret " which forbade men to print their own speeches, to read the official reports taken of them, to read those of their brother bishops, and other extra vagances besides, of which the True Story has not one syllable to tell — that " secret," or any such, is not hinted at in the admonition of the legates at Trent. The extent of silence imposed at the Vatican would seem to have been as original as the mortal sin there invented. I \ Still further, the Cardinal would appear to be under an impression that the reason why at Trent certain inconvenient publications occurred was because that, at the outset, the strict precautions had been there omitted which at the Vatican were not only taken in time, but, with manifold forethought, were, before the time, as our story will tell, tied and bound by edict and by oath. As to disclosures, however, that occurred at the Vatican, which most Romans would tell any Englishman, except a priest or a convert j would be certain to occur, namely, that the " pontifical secret " would be dealt in as a thing to be sold. Did the precautions omitted at Trent, but adopted at the Vatican, prevent so, much from transpiring as compelled xxviii POSTSCRIPT TO THE PREFACE the Pope to loose from the bond four selected prelates, including the eminent author of the True Story, in order that they might disabuse the outside world? Did it prevent the famous canons which opened the eyes of Austrian and French states men from making a quick passage to Augsburg and to Printing House Square ?— of which canons, by the way, as of most essential matters, the True Story tells not a word. It would be very tempting to select for remark other asser tions of the Cardinal, but this may suffice to do all that I here wish to do ; that is, to set the reader upon intelligently watching and sifting statements of my own ; for what is to be desired on this subject is that the public shall cease to be easily con tented with what is said on one side or the other. My state ments, like those of others, are sure to contain a fair proportion of mistakes, but when all these are winnowed away, there will remain a considerable peck of corn. Not content with formally vouching, in his title, for his own truthfulness, the Cardinal formally impeaches that of others. Both of these proceedings would be perfectly natural in a priest in Rome, and especially in one attached to the Jesuit school. Had I foreseen the cautious beginning of such habits that was so soon to be made by high authority, certainly I should not have so far yielded to the repugnance one feels to put specimens of priestly imputations into our language — a language which had for ages, up to the date of the Tracts for the Times, been steadily acquiring an antipathy to all the aris of untruthfulness, and consequently to all the forms in which other languages habitually insinuate or openly allege it. But I cannot regret that my story purposely excludes full specimens, and only by force of frequent necessity admits morsels, of the style in which in Rome every shade of untruthfulness, from suppression and equivocation to the worst kinds of perjury and forgery, is on the one hand charged upon heretics, on Liberal Catholics, on statesmen, and is on the other hand in return, and with extreme good will, charged upon bishops, cardinals and popes. The veracity of Pomponio Leto— -that is, as all Italy knows, POSTSCRIPT TO THE PREFACE xxix of the Marchese Francesco Vitelleschi, brother of the late Cardinal Vitelleschi — is openly impugned by Cardinal Manning. We already know, on more points than one, the opinion of Vitelleschi as to the eminent author of the True Story ; and retaliation would have been natural had it only been fair. If Vitelleschi wrote English, and if he cared to compare his truthfulness with that of such a competitor, it would be in teresting to hear him fairly fight out the question, Which of us two has, to the best of his power, tried just to tell what he knew, inventing nothing and concealing nothing ? It does not seem at all certain that the Englishman would bear away from the Italian the palm of straightforwardness. The Cardinal is evidently not aware that certain alleged particulars of the famous Strossmayer scene, which he ascribes to Pom- ponio Leto, are not in his description of it either in the Italian or in the English version. From where the Cardinal gets them I do not know. But his picture of Schwarzenberg " carried fainting from the ambo to his seat," his idea that Pomponio professes on that day to have been outside the Council door and to have seen " the servants rushing," and his other idea that at the fourth session Pomponio professes to have been inside and consequently forgot that many of those who were outside could see through the great door which was wide open, are all alike. He certainly did not get any of them from Vitelleschi. As it is after stating these errors, that his Eminence cries, " Such melodramatic and mendacious stuff ! " we must imagine how Vitelleschi will smile at this new display of certain qualities which did not escape his keen eye. Professor Friedrich is slightingly spoken of by the Cardinal. Here again retaliation, if fair, would have been natural ; for Cardinal Manning has already felt the steel of Friedrich. Judging from my own impression that under the slashes of Friedrich what the Cardinal had employed as if he took it for argument appeared perfectly helpless, I should expect that it the learned professor should think it worth while to try his strength on the sort of history, theology, and logic which the Cardinal thinks may pass in England, they would in his hands, xxx POSTSCRIPT TO THE PREFACE at almost every debatable point, fly to pieces. As to veracity, however, Friedrich has already, on that score, as our story will show, crossed swords with more bishops than one ; and whether on that or other matters, certainly he is not the man to turn his back on Cardinal Manning, whose measure he has long ago taken, as, even under the eyes of the Papal police, he did not fear to show. Cardinal Manning occupies pages with imputations, and with quotations which he apparently thinks warrant the imputations. Does he, or do the witnesses he calls, disprove any of the speci fic facts alleged ? Yes, he does disprove one. Vitelleschi, in describing the great session of the Council, said that Cardinal Corsi and other discontented Cardinals pulled down their red hats over their eyes. Now, Cardinal Manning properly says that on that occasion they had no hats of any colour, meaning that they wore the mitre. Therefore a real blot is hit. And it is curious how exactly this is the same kind of blot as the Jesuits of the Civiltd were able to hit in the early part of Vitelleschi's book, when, like the True Story, it first appeared in a periodical. They clearly convicted the author, then unknown even to them, of saying that in certain solemnities the robes were red, whereas in fact they were white. We must, however, do the Roman Jesuits the justice to say that from this tremendous error they did not attempt to prove that the writer was given to " mendacious stuff," though they did argue that he was wanting in reflection. But it is a well-known fact that grave matters — very grave matters — were with sufficient particularity alleged against the Pope, against the Presidents, against the Rules of Procedure, against the authorized Press, against the favourites of the Court among the bishops, against the secret way in which " the Council was made beforehand," and above all against the political designs which were entertained ; and, one must ask, with what single fact of all these is any manly attempt made to grapple by the Cardinal, or by the bishops whom he cites in his support ? Besides these facts, of which some were amusing, some absurd, some discreditable, there were others POSTSCRIPT TO THE PREFACE xxxi which for all good men except Papists, in the proper sense, were seriously alarming, and these were alleged by Catholic and Liberal Catholic, by men in opposition and by men in all places of authority up to the highest — by Vitelleschi, by Friedrich. by Veuillot, by Guerin, by Frond and his contributors, by Ce Qui se Passe au Concile, by Hefele, by Kenrick, by Darboy, by Rauscher, by Place, by Dupanloup, by the hundred and thirty bishops who signed the protest against even discussing infallibility, by the groups of bishops who signed that against the Rules of Procedure, by those who signed the solemn one against the new Rules, by those who petitioned for the ABC of deliberative freedom, by the scores who signed the historical petition of April io, 1870, by those who protested against the unfair and arbitrary attempt of July 5, and by those fifty-five who, the day before the final session, placed in the hands of the Pope their protest, saying that if they voted in the public session they could only repeat, and that with stronger reasons, their previous vote — that is, of Non placet ; a protest of which Cardinal Manning has taken a strangely inaccurate and mis leading view. Such facts were alleged by La Liberie du Concile, by La Demiere Heure du Concile, by Mamiani, by Bonghi, by Beust, by Daru, by Arnim, by Acton, by Montalembert, by Dollinger ; and still more bythe Civiltd Cattolica, the Stimmen aus Maria Laach, the Univers, the Monde, and the Unitd Cattolica ; and most of all were they embodied in the words and official manifestoes of Pope Pius IX. What one of these alarming or discreditable or equivocal facts is disposed of by the passages which Cardinal Manning in his need has cited ? He cites Hefele to prove that people who were outside of the Council told falsehoods as to what passed inside. But with the wonted sequence of his logic, what he proves out of the mouth of Hefele is that people who were inside of the Council sold the secret, though in doing so they incurred the pains of mortal sin. The proof is quite as apposite as many of those relied upon by Cardinal Manning, and it is no wonder that such a habit of reasoning should have landed him where he is. He cites of all men Ketteler. Now supposing that Ketteler was xxxii POSTSCRIPT TO THE PREFACE the person to invalidate serious testimony, what particular fact is disproved by the passage cited ? The only one it affects to touch is the question as to whether, in substance, the anti- infallibilist doctrine of Dollinger was not also that of the majority of the German bishops. That question is not faced in front. Ketteler only raises a side issue. He denies that on some certain occasion, certain bishops had in a certain way made a statement to that effect. Cardinal Manning has not lived so long in Rome, and learned so much there, without knowing something of the value of such contradictions. But if he means — as, however reluctantly, one must take him to mean— to use Ketteler to prove to Englishmen that the majority of the German bishops were not, before July 1870, opposed to that as a doctrine which is now a dogma of their creed, then let Ketteler by all means stand on one side, but pamphlets, memoranda, speeches, petitions, votes, protests stand on the other. Ketteler is cited against Dollinger, and agreeably to the all but infallible felicity of the Cardinal's logic, about the most definite thing Ketteler says against the Provost is that Janus, for falsification of history, can hardly be compared to anything but the Provincial Letters of Pascal. Had the Cardinal cited the whole body of the German bishops, he might, indeed, with English Catholics have gained some show of authority ; but how would it have been with the fellow-countrymen of those prelates ? or with any who, like their fellow-countrymen, had, in the two Fulda manifestoes of 1869 and 1870, and in 9ther words and deeds of those mitred diplomatists — words and deeds which cannot be erased — learned at what rate to prize statements signed by their episcopal crosses ? There are in Europe few bodies of function aries who stood in sorer need than did these German bishops of something to rehabilitate the credit of their Yea and Nay ; not that even yet it seems to have fallen quite so low as that of their superiors of the Curia ; at least, not quite so low in matters of purely personal reputation, when no official obliga tion exists to make a public impression which is contrary to the facts, and when dissimulation, if practised, arises from a habit POSTSCRIPT TO THE PREFACE xxxiii partly professional, partly personal, and one sometimes in dulged in as an exercise of cleverness. Cardinals hardly do prudently to raise on English soil questions about truthful ness ; for the English public will not much longer be content to take information at haphazard or at second-hand, but will go to the fountains, and learn about things in Rome as things in Rome in reality have been. LIST OF WORKS QUOTED OR REFERRED TO AS AUTHORITIES The titles and editions being here given, the references in each particular instance will be no longer than is sufficient to identify the work. Some works cited only once are not here entered, their titles being given at full in the body of the book. The few EngUsh writers quoted are not inserted here. Acta et Decreta Sacrosancti CEcumenici Concilii Vaticani. Romae Impensis Paulini Lazzarini Typographi Concilii Vaticani : 1872. Acta et Decreta Sacrosancti et CEcumenici Concilii Vaticani cum permission e Superiorum. Friburgi Brisgovies : Herder, 1871. Contains the En cyclical and Syllabus of December 8, 1864, and some other useful docu ments not published in the Roman edition ; but does not contain its brief historical notes of the pubhc sessions. Acta Genuina SS. CEcumenici Concilii Tridentini, nunc primum integra edita ab Augustino Theiner. Zagrabies Croatiee : 2 vols, small folio, 1874. Always referred to as Theiner. Acta Sanctae Sedis in Compendium Opportune Redacta. Romae S. C. De Propaganda Fide. A volume has appeared annually since 1865. Actes et Histoire du Concile CEcumenique de Rome, 1869. Pubii.es sous la direction de Victor Frond. Paris : Abel Pilou. 8 vols, large folio, with numerous illustrations. A brief of the Pope warrants to the Editor the " counsel and approbation of the Holy Apostolical See ; " and also gives him the Apostolic Benediction " as a guarantee of the divine patronage." The references are always to Frond. Acton, Lord — Zur Geschichte des Vaticanischen Conciles. Miinchen : 1 87 1 . — Sendschreiben an einen Deutschen Bischof des Vaticanischen Concils. Nordlingen : September, 1870. Annuario Pontificio, 1870. Roma Tipografia della Rev. Cam. Apostolica. Biblioth&rae Universelle et Revue Suisse. Lausanne. Montalembert's L'Espagne et la Liberte is contained in Nos. 217-21, from January to May, 1876. Ce Qui se Passe au Concile. Paris : 1870. Condemned by the Council. Cecconi, Eugenio (now Archbishop of Florence) — Storia del Concilio Vaticano scritta sui documenti originah. Parte prima Antecedenti del Concilio. Vol. I. Roma : A Spese di Paulini Lazzarini, Tipografo del Concilio Vaticano, 1873. The official history of the secret proceedings of five years. Civiltd Cattolica (La), Anno Vigesimottavo. Serie X. vol. i. Quaderno, 641. Firenze : 3 Marzo, 1877. This is the title of the latest number. It has appeared fortnightly since the year 1850. It is quoted as Civiltd (e.g.) X. i. 5 — the first numeral noting the series, the second the volume, the third the page. Concile du Vatican, le, et le Mouvement Anti-infaillibiliste en Allemagne. 2 vols, octavo. Brussels : 1871. Concile CEcumenique, le. Par Mgr. l'Evfique de Grenoble. Paris : 1869. Derniere Heure du Concile. Miinchen : 1870. Condemned by the Council ; said by Quirinus to be by a member of the Council, possessing " almost unique opportunities," xxxvi LIST OF WORKS QUOTED Desanctis, L.— Roma Papale descritta in una serie di Lettere. Firenze : 1 87 1 . II Papa, osservazioni Dottrinali e Storiche. Firenze : 1864. __ Deschamps, Archbishop of MaUns (now Cardinal).— Reponse a Mgr. 1 Eveque D'Orleans. Paris : 1870. Documenta. See Friedrich. Documenti (i) Citati nel Syllabus edito per ordine del Sommo Pontifice Pio Papa IX. Preceduti da Analoghe Avvertenze. Firenze : 1865. Like tne French Recueil, contains the documents cited in the Syllabus, but with Italian notes, and without any translation. Dollinger D — Erwagungen fur die Bischofe des Concilium's iiber die Frage der papstlichen Unfehlbarkeit. Miinchen: October, 1869.— Die neue Geschaftsordnung des Concils und ihre theologische Bedeutung. Augs burg : 1870. — Erklarung an den Erzbischof von Miinchen-Freising. Miinchen: 1871. , , Dupanloup— Lettre de Mgr., L'Eveque D'Orleans au clerge de son Diocese relativement a la definition de l'infaillibilite au prochain Concile. Paris : 1869. The original is reprinted with the Enghsh version of Vitelleschi, Eight Months at Rome. — Reponse de Mgr. L'Eveque D'Orl6ans a Mgr. Deschamps. Paris : Duniol, 1870.— Reponse de Mgr. L'Ev6que D'Or leans a Mgr. Spalding, Archeveque de Baltimore, accompagne d'une lettre de plusieurs Archeveques et Eveques Americain a Mgr. I'Eveque d'Or- leans. Naples : 1870. _ Fessler, Dr. Joseph, Bishop of St. Polten — Das letzte und das nachste allge- meine Concil. Freiburg-in-Brisgau : 1869. Friedberg, Dr. Emil, Professor, Leipsic — Sammlung der Aktenstiicke zum ersten Vaticanischen Concil. Tubingen : 1872. Always quoted as Friedberg. Friedrich, Dr. J., Professor, Munich — Tagebuch wahrend des Vaticanischen Concils gefiihrt. Zweite vermehrte Auflage. Nordlingen : 1873. — Documenta ad Illustrandum Concilium Vaticanum, anni 1870. Both the first and second Abtheilung are of Nordlingen, 1871. Quoted as Documenta. — Der Mechanismus der Vaticanischen Rehgion. Bonn : 1876. Fromman, Theodor — Geschichte und Kritik des Vaticanischen Concils. Gotha : 1872. A Protestant writer, therefore scarcely ever cited. Frond, Victor — Actes et Histoire, etc. 8 vols, fol. See " Actes," etc. Gury, P. Joanne Petro — Compendium Theologiae Moralis, S. I. editio in Germania Quarta. Ratisbon : 1868. — Casus Conscientiae in Praecipuas Quaestiones Theologiae Moralis editio in Germania prima. Ratisbon : 1865. Guerin, Mgr. Paul, Chamberlain to Pius IX. — Concile CEcumenique du Vatican son Histoire ses decisions en Latin et en Francais. Professes to give all the documents, but gives only a portion even of those officially published. Bar-le-Duc : 1871. 2nd ed. Gregorovius, Ferdinand. — Geschichte der Stadt Rom im Mittelalter vom V. bis zum XVI. Jahrhundert. Zweite Auflage : 1869. 8 vols, octavo. Hefele, Carolus Josephus Episcopus Rottenburgensis — Causa Honorii Papae. Neapoli : 1870. Hergenrother, Dr. Joseph, Professor, Wiirzburg — Katholische Kirche und Christlicher Staat in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwickelung und in Beziehung auf die Fragen der Gegenwart. Freiburg-in-Brisgau : 1873. — Kritik der v. Dolhngerschen Erklarung vom 28 Marz d.I. Freiburg-in-Brisgau : 1871. Holtgreven, Anton, Konigl. Preuss. Kreisrichter — Das Verhaltniss Zwischen Staat und Kirche. Berlin : 1875. Kenrick, Archbishop of St. Louis in America — Concio Petri Ricardi Kenrick, Archiepiscopi S. Ludovici in Statibus Foederatis Americae Septentrionalis in Concilio Vaticano Habenda at non Habita. Neapoli : 1870 This invaluable pamphlet is reprinted with Friedrich's Documenta, and is always cited as there found, the pamphlet itself being within the reach of but very few, LIST OF WORKS QUOTED xxxvii Ketteler, von, WUhelm Emmanuel Freiherr, Bishop of Mainz — Das Allge- meine ConcU und seine Bedeutung fur unsere Zeit. Mainz : 1869. — Die Unwahrheiten der Romischen Briefe vom Concil in der AUgemeinen Zeitung. Mainz : 1870. Several other pamphlets by Bishop von Ketteler not referred to are of value. Langen, Dr. Joseph, Professor, Bonn — Das Vaticanische Dogma in seinem Verhaltniss zum Neuen Testament, etc. Bonn : 1873. Liverani, Monsignor Francesco, Prelato Domestico e Protonotorio della Santa Sede. — II Papato, LTmpero e II Regno DTtaUa. Firenze : 1861. Maret, Mgr. H. L. C, Bishop of Sura, Dean of the Theological Faculty of Paris — Le Contile Generale et la Paix ReUgieuse. 2 vols, octavo. Paris 1869. Martin, Conrad, Bishop of Paderborn. — Omnium Concilii Vaticani Qua ad doctrinam et Disciplinam pertinent Documentorum Collectio. Paderbornae : 1873. A very incomplete coUection, but very useful. — Katechismus des Romisch-Katolischen Kirchenrechts. Zweite Auflage : 1874. Menzel, Professor — Ueber das Subject der Kirchlichen Unfehlbarkeit (als Manuscript gedruckt). Braunsberg : 1870. Menzel, Wolfgang — Geschichte der neuesten Jesuitenumtriebe in Deutschland. Stuttgart : 1873. — Die Wichtigsten Weltbegebenheiten vom Prager Frieden bis zum Kriege mit Frankreich (1866-70). 2 vols. Stuttgart 1871. Michaud, L'Abb6 — De la Falsification des Catechismes Francais. Paris, 1872. Many other works of Michaud, not cited, are of great value. Michelis, Dr. F., Professor, Braunsberg. — Kurze Geschichte des Vaticanischen Concils. Constanz : 1875. — Der Neue Fuldaer Hirtenbrief in seinem Verhaltniss zur Wahrheit. Braunsberg : 1870. — Der hdretische Charakter der Infattibilita tslehre. Eine Katholische Antwort auf die Romische Excommunication, 1872. Observationes Quaedam de InfaUibiUtatis Ecclesiae Subjecto. Vindobonae : 1870. Cardinal Rauscher (see Friedberg, 1 1 1 ). Also pubUshed in Naples, without name of printer or pubhsher. PhiUips, George — Kirchenrecht. 7 vols, octavo. Regensburg : 1855-72. Pope Pius IX — Discorsi del Sommo Pontefice Pius IX Pronunziati in Vaticano ai fedeh di Roma e dell' Orbe ; raccolti e pubblicati dal P. Don Pasquale de Franciscis. Roma: 1872; and the second volume, 1873. It is to be regretted that these curious and instructive volumes are not translated into EngUsh. RecueU des AUocutions Consistoriales EncycUques et Autres Lettres Aposto- Uque des Souverains Pontifs Clement XII, Benoit XIV, Pie VI, Pie VII, Leon XII, Gregoire XVI, et Pie IX, citees dans l'Encyclique et le SyUabus du 8 Decembre, 1864. Octavo, p. 580. Paris : 1865. Every document cited in the Syllabus is given at fuU, with a French translation. Reform der Romischen Kirche an Haupt and GUedern. Leipsig : 1869. Reinkens, Dr. Joseph Hubert, Bishop — Revolution und Kirche Beantwortung l _j einer Tagesfrage mit Rucksight auf die gegenwartige Tendenz und Praxis j..: der Romischen Curie. Bonn: 1876. — Ueber papstUche Unfehlbarkeit. Miinchen : 1870. Rheinischer Merkur. Erscheint jeden Samstag, Koln. A weekly journal, organ of the old Catholics. Now pubUshed in Munich as the Deutscher Merkur. Sambin, Le R. P. de la Compagnie de Jesus — Histoire du ConcUe CEcumenique et General du Vatican. Lyon : 1871. Schrader, P. Clemens, S. I. — Pius IX als Papst und als Kcenig. Wien : 1865 — Der Papst und die Modernen Ideen. Wien : 1865. Sepp, Professor Abgeordneter — Deutschland und der Vatikan. Munchen : 1872. SogUa — SeptimU M. Vecchiotti, Institutiones Canonicae ex operibus Joannis Card. SogUa excerptae et ad usum seminariorum accommodatae. Editio decimasexta ad meUorem formam redacta et additamentis locupleta. In xxxviii LIST OF WORKS QUOTED 3 vols, octavo. Turin : 1875. Sold at MUan, Venice, Naples, and Romae apud Tipographiam de Propaganda Fide. Stimmen aus der KathoUschen Kirche Miinchen. A series of pamphlets containing writings of Dollinger, Friedrich, Huber, Schmitz, Reinkens, Liano, and others — of great value. Stimmen aus Maria Loach, Katholische Bldter — Freiburg-in-Brisgau. The first number appeared in 1865, after the pubhcation of the Syllabus ; the Neue Folge, commenced in 1869, has on the title ".Unter Beniitzung Romischer Mittheilungen und der Arbeiten der Civilta." Summi Pontificis InfalUbihtate Personali (de). Naples : 1870. Friedberg (p. m says that this tract was distributed by Cardinal Prince Schwarzen- berg, but written by the Cistercian Franz Salesius Mayer. Tarquini, Camillo E., Societate Jesu (Cardinal) — Juris Ecclesiastici PubUci Institutiones. Editio quarta. Roma S. C. de Propaganda Fide. 1875. Theologisches Literaturblatt. Erscheint alle 14 Toge. Bonn, herausgegeben von Prof. Dr. F. H. Reusch. A fortnightly pubUcation, of great value to all who wish to understand the literature of the modern phases of Romanism, and also of the old Catholic movement. Vnitd Cattolica, edited by Don Margotti, appears daUy in Turin. Holds in Italy a position similar to that of the Univers in France. Univers, edited by M. Louis Veuillot, appears daily, Paris. Veuillot is a layman. Veuillot, Louis — Rome pendant le Concile. 2 vols, octavo. Paris : 1872. Contains important matter dating from 1867. Vitelleschi, Marchese Francesco — Otto Mesi a Roma durante il ConciUo Vaticano per Pomponio Leto. Firenze : 1873. An Enghsh translation has now appeared entitled Eight Months at Rome, by Pomponio Leto. Always referred to as Vitelleschi. The real authorship of the work is no secret in Rome, nor is it treated as such. CONTENTS BOOK I FROM THE ISSUE OF THE SYLLABUS TO ITS SOLEMN CONFIRMATION, DECEMBER 1 864 TO JUNE 1 867 CHAPTER I The First Secret Command to commence Preparations for a General Council, December 6, 1864 — Meeting of Congregation — All but Cardinals sent out — Secret Order — Events of the 8th — Solemn Anniversary — A historical coup de soleil ..... CHAPTER II The EncycUcal Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864 — Causes of the Ruin of Modern Society : rejection of the "force" of the Church — Religious EquaUty — Pretensions of Civil Law and of Parents to Control Education — Laws of Mortmain — Remedies — Restoration of the Authority of the Church — Connecting Links between Encyclical and Syllabus — Retrospect of Evidences that all Society was in Ruins — The Movement for Reconstruction ..... CHAPTER III Foundation of a Literature of Reconstruction, Serial and Scholastic — The Civiltd Cattolica : its Views on Education and on Church and State — Tarquini's Political Principles of Pope and King — Measures Preparatory to the Syllabus 14 CHAPTER IV Further Measures Preparatory to the SyUabus — Changes in Italy since 1846 Progress of Adverse Events — A Commination of Liberties — A Second Assembly of Bishops without Parliamentary Functions — The Curse on Italy — Origin of the phrase " A Free Church in a Free State" — Projected Universal Monarchy .... 28 xl CONTENTS PAGE CHAPTER V The SyUabus of Errors, December 8, 1864— Character of the Propositions condemned — Disabilities of the State — Powers of the Church . . 43 CHAPTER VI The Secret Memoranda of the Cardinals, February 1865 . • 57 CHAPTER VII A Secret Commission to prepare for a Council, March 1865 — First Summons — Points determined — Reasons why Princes are not con sulted — Plan for the Future Council 62 CHAPTER VIII Memoranda of Thirty-six chosen Bishops, consulted under Bond of Strictest Secrecy, April to August, 1865 — Doctrine of Church and State — Antagonism of History and the Embryo Dogma — Nuncios admitted to the Secret — And Oriental Bishops ... 65 CHAPTER IX Interruption of Preparations for Fourteen Months, through the conse quences of Sadowa — The French evacuate Rome — AUeged Double DeaUng of Napoleon III — The Civiltd on St. Bairtholomew's — Change of Plan — Instead of a Council a Great Display — Serious Complaints of Liberal Catholics ...... 70 CHAPTER X Reprimand of Darboy, Archbishop of Paris, for disputing the Ordinary and Immediate Jurisdiction of the Pope in his Diocese — Sent in 1864 Published in 1869 ........ 76 CHAPTER XI Great Gathering in Rome, June 1867 — Impressions and Anticipations — Improvements in the City — Louis VeuUlot on the Great Future . 83 CHAPTER XII The Pohtical Lesson of the Gathering, namely, AU are called upon to recognize in the Papal States the Model State of the World— Survey pfthose States 87 CONTENTS xii CHAPTER XIII Solemn Confirmation of the Syllabus by the Pope before the assembled Hierarchy, and their Acquiescence, June 17, 1867. BOOK II FROM THE FIRST PUBLIC INTIMATION OF A COUNCIL TO THE EVE OF THE OPENING, JUNE 1 867 TO DECEMBER 1 869 '¦_: | CHAPTER I First Pubhc Intimation of the intention to hold a Council, June 26 to July 1, 1867 — Consistory — Acquiescence in the Syllabus of the assembled Bishops — The Canonized Inquisitor — Questions and Returns preparatory to Greater Centralization — Manning on the Ceremonies — O'ConneU on the Doctrines of the Papists — The Doc trine of Direct and Indirect Power . . . . .113 CHAPTER II Six Secret Commissions preparing — Interrupted by Garibaldi — A Code for the Relations of the Church and Civil Society — Special Sitting with Pope and AntoneUi to decide on the Case of Princes — Tales of the Crusaders — English Martyrs — Children on the Altar — Autumn of 1867 to June 1868 . 131 CHAPTER III Bull of Convocation — Doctrine of the Sword — The Crusade of St. Peter — Incidents — Mission to the Orientals, and Overtures to Protestants in different Countries — June 1868 to December 1868-69 • • J43 CHAPTER IV Princes, Ministers, and their Confessors — Montalembert's part in the Revival — His Posthumous Work on Spain — Indignation against the New Assumptions — Debate of Clergy in Paris on the Lawfulness of Absolving a Liberal Prince or Minister — Wrath at Rome — True Doc trines taught to Darboy and his Clergy 153 CHAPTER V What is to be the Work of the Council — Fears caused by Grandiose Projects — Reform of the Church in Head and Members — Statesmen evince Concern ......... 164 xiii CONTENTS PAGE CHAPTER &VI Agitation in Bavaria and Germany — The Golden Rose — Fall of Isabella — The King of Bavaria obtains the opinion of the Faculties — Dollinger — Schwarzenberg's Remonstrance . . 176 CHAPTER VII Intention of proposing the Dogma of Infallibility intimated — Bavarian Note to the Cabinets, February to April, 1869 — Arnim and Bis marck . . . . . . . . . .182 CHAPTER VIII Indulgences — Excitement— The Two Brothers Dufournel — Senestrey's Speech — Hopes of the Ruin of Germany — What the Council will do — Absurdity of Constitutional Kings— The True Saviour of Society — Lay Address from Coblenz — Montalembert adheres to it — Rehgious Liberty does not answer — Importance of keeping Cathohc ChUdren apart from the Nation — War on Liberal Catholics — Flags of all Na tions doing Homage to that of the Pope . . . . 186 CHAPTER IX Publication of Janus — Hotter Controversy — Bishop Maret's Book — P6re Hyacinth — The Saviour of Society again — Dress — True Doctrine of Concordats not Contracts but Papal Laws — Every Catholic State has Two Heads — Four National Governments condemned in One Day — What a Free Church means — Fulda Manifesto — Meeting of Catholic Notables in Berlin — Pohtical Agitation in Bavaria and Austria — Stumpf's Critique of the Jesuit Schemes . . . 197 CHAPTER X Conflicting Manifestoes by Bishops— Attacks on Bossuet — Darboy Dupanloup combats Infallibility — His relations with Dr. Pusey Deschamps rephes — Manning's Manifesto — Retort of Friedrich Discordant Episcopal Witnesses . . . . . 2i. CHAPTER XI Diplomatic FeeUng and Fencing in Rome, November 1869 Cross Pohcies on Separation of Church and State — Ollivier, Favre, De Banneville— Doctrines of French Statesmen ridiculed at Rome Specimens of the Utterances approved at Court — Forecasts of War between France and Prussia — Growing Strength of the Movement in France for Universities Canonically Instituted . . .231 CONTENTS xliii PAGE CHAPTER XII Mustering, and Preparatory StimuU — Pope's HospitaUty — Alleged Political Intent — Friedrich's First Notes — The Nations cited to Judgment — New War of the Rosary — Tarquini's Doctrine of the Sword — A New Guardian of the Capitol — November and December, 1869 239 CHAPTER XIII Great Ceremony of Executive Spectacle, caUed a Pro-Synodal Congrega tion, to forestaU Attempts at Self-Organization on the Part of the CouncU — The Scene — The Allocution — Officers appointed by Royal Proclamation — Oath of- Secrecy — Papers Distributed — How the Nine had foreseen and forestalled aU Questions of Self-Organization — The Assembly made into a Conclave, not a General Council — Cecconi's Apology for the Rules * • * • • • • 24° CHAPTER XIV The Eve of the CouncU — Rejoicings — Rome the Universal Fatherland — Veuillot' s Joy — Processions — Symbolic Sunbeams — The Joybells — The Vision of St. Ambrose — The Disfranchisement of Kings . . 262 BOOK III FROM THE OPENING OF THE COUNCIL TO THE INTRODUCTION OF THE QUESTION OF INFALLIBILITY CHAPTER _ The First Session, December 8, 1869, or Opening Ceremony — Mustering — Robing — The Procession — The Anthem and Mass — The Sermon — The Act of Obedience — The AUocution — The Incensing — Passing Decrees — The TeiDeum — Appreciations of various Witnesses. . 271 CHAPTER II ;'¦ First|Proceedings — Unimportant Committees and All-Important Commis- ', sions — No Council if Pope dies — Theologians discover their Disfran chisement — Father Ambrose — Parties and Party Tactics — Were the Bishops Free Legislators ? — Plans of Reconstruction — Plan of the German Bishops— Segesser's Plan — New Bull of Excommunications 308 xliv CONTENTS PAGE. CHAPTER III Further Party Manoeuvres— Election of Permanent Committees— Bull Of Excommunications— Various opinions of it— Position of Antonelli— No serious Discussion desired— Perplexities of the Bishops— Reisach s Code suppressed— It may reappear— Attitude of Governments . 333 CHAPTER IV First open Collisions of Opinion— Pending Debate— Fear of an Acclama tion— Rauscher opens— Kenrick— Tizzani— General discontent with the Draft— Vacant Hats— Speaking by Rank— Strossmayer— No permission to read the Reports, even of their own Speeches— Con- flicting Views— Petitions to Pope from Bishops— Homage of Science — Theism . 35° CHAPTER V The Second Public Session— Swearing a Creed never before known in a General Council— Really an Oath including Feudal Obedience . 379 CHAPTER VI Speech of the Pope against the Opposition— Future Pohcy set before France — Count Arnim's Views — Resumed Debate — Haynald — A New Mortal Sin— Count Daru and French Pohcy — Address calling for the New Dogma — Counter Petitions against the Principle as well as the Opportuneness . . . . • • • 59l CHAPTER] VII Matters of DiscipUne — Remarks of Friedrich on the Morals of the Clergy — Also on the War against Modern Constitutions— Morahty of recent Jesuit Teaching — Darboy's Speech — Melcher's Speech — A Dinner Party of FaUibihsts — One of InfaUibiUsts — Gratry — Debate on the Morals of the Clergy . . . . . . • 411 CHAPTER VIII Church and State — Draft of Decrees with Canons — Gains Publicity — Principles involved — Views of Liberal Catholics — The Papal View of the Means of Resistance possessed by Governments . . . 431 CHAPTER IX The Courts of Vienna and Paris manifest Anxiety — Disturbances in Paris — Daru's Letters — Beust moves — His Despatches — His Passage ot Arms with AntonelU — Daxu's Despatch and AntonelU's Reply — Daru's Rejoinder — Beust lays down the Course which Austria wiU follow — Arnim's Despatch — The Unitd on the Situation — VeuUlot on the Situation — Satisfaction of the Ultramontanes CONTENTS xiv PAGE CHAPTER X Personal Attack on Dupanloup — Attempts at a Compromise — Impossi bility of now retreating — Daru Resigns — Ollivier's Policy — Feeling that the Proceedings must be Shortened — The Episode of the Patri arch of Babylon — Proposal for a New Catechism — Michaud on Changes in Catechism — The Rules revised — An Archbishop stopped — Protest of One Hundred Bishops — Movement of Sympathy with Dollinger — The Pope's Chat — Pope and M. de Falloux — Internal Struggle of Friedrich . . . . . . . -457 BOOK IV FROM THE INTRODUCTION OF THE QUESTION OF INFALLIBILITY TO THE SUSPENSION OF THE COUNCIL CHAPTER I Joy of Don Margotti — New Feelers for an Acclamation — Suggested Model of the Scene — Its Pohtical Import — A Pause — Case of the Jesuit Kleutgen — Schwarzenberg out of Favour — Politics of Poland — DoUinger on the New Rules — Last Protest of Montalembert — His Death — Consequent Proceedings in Rome . . .479 CHAPTER II Threat of American Prelates — Acclamation again faUs — New Protest — Decrees on Dogma — Ingenious connexion of Creation with the Curia — Serious AUegations of Unfair and Irregular Proceedings of the Officials — Fears at the Opening of the New Session — The Three Devotions of Rome — More Hatred of Constitutions — Noisy Sitting ; Strossmayer put down — The Pope's Comments — He compares the Opposition to Pilate and to the Freemasons — He is reconciled to M6rode— The Idea of Charlemagne— Secret Change of a Formula before the Vote 49° CHAPTER III Important Secret Petition of Rauscher and others — Clear Statement of Pohtical Bearings of the Question — A Formal Demand that the Question whether Power over Kings and Nations was given to Peter shall be argued — Complaints of Manning — Dr. Newman's Letter — The Civiltd exorcises Newman — VeuUlot's Gibes at him — Conflicts with the Orientals — Armenians in Rome attacked by the Pohce — Priests arrested — Broil in the Streets — Convent placed under Interdict — Third Session — Forms — Decrees unanimously adopted — ¦ Their Extensive Practical Effects ...... 504 d xlvi CONTENTS PAGE CHAPTER IV To the end of the General Debate on the Decrees De Ecclesia, June 3 — Temporal Benefit to the Curia of Spiritual Centralization— Spald ing's Proposals— Impatience of the Pope and Veuillot — Outcry against Ce Qui se Passe au Concile — All other Subjects to be Post poned, and InfallibiUty to be brought on out of its order — Renewed protest of Minority — Open Change of Dispute from one on Oppor tuneness to one on the Merits of the Dogma — Anecdotes of Bishops —Violations of Rules— Private Notes of Bishops on the Dogma — Doubts cast on the Authority of the CouncU— Formula of New Decree — Ho'w it will Work ....¦•• 525 CHAPTER V The Great Debate — Bishop Pie — The Virgin Mary on Infalhbihty — Cullen claims Ireland and MacHale — Kenrick's Reply, and his Account of the first Introduction of the Doctrine into Maynooth — MacHale speaks— Full Report of Darboy's Speech — The Pope gives Signs of Pleasure at Saldanha's Assault on the King of Portugal — New Date fixed for the Great Definition — Manning's Great Speech — Remarkable Reply of Kenrick — McEviUy ascribes Cathohc Emancipation not to the Effect of Oaths, but to that of the Fear of Civil War — Kenrick's Retort — Clifford against Manning — Verot's Scene — Spalding's Attack on Kenrick — Kenrick's Refutation — Speeches of Valerga, Purcell, Conolly, and Maret — Sudden Close of the Debate 546 CHAPTER VI To the Close of the Special Debate on Infallibihty, July 4 — Proposal of the Minority to resist — They yield once more — Another Protest — Efforts to procure Unanimity — Hope of the Minority in Delay — Pope disregards the Heat — Disgrace of Theiner — Decree giving to Pope ordinary Jurisdiction everywhere — His Superiority to Law — Debate on Infallibility — Speech of Guidi — Great Emotion — Scene with the Pope — Close of the Debate — Present view of the Civiltd as to PoUtics — Specimens of the Official Histories — Exultation . . -573 CHAPTER VII To the Eve of the Great Session, July 18 — -A Fresh Shock for the Oppo sition — Serious Trick of the Presidents and Committee — Outcry of the French Bishops — Proposal to Quit the Council — They send in another Protest — What is Protestantism ? — Immediate War not foreseen — Contested Canon adopted — The Bishops threatened — Hasty Proceedings — Final Vote on the Dogma — Unexpected Firm ness of the Minority — Effect of the Vote — Deputation to the Pope — — His incredible Prevarication — Ketteler's Scene — Counter Deputa tion of Manning and Senestrey — Vast Changes in the Decrees made in a Moment: — Petty Condemnations — The Minority flies . . 597 CONTENTS xlvii PAGE CHAPTER VIII Grief of M. Veuillot — Final Deputation and Protest .... 624 CHAPTER IX From the Great Session to the Suspension of the Council, October 20, 1870 — The Time now come for the Fulfilment of Promises — Position and Prospects — Second Empire and Papacy fall together — Style of Address to the Pope — War for the Papal Empire Foreshadowed — — Latest Act of the Council — Italy moves on Rome — Capture of the City — Suspension of the Council — Attitude of the Church changed — Last Events of 1870 ........ 646 CHAPTER X How far has the Vatican Movement been a Success, and how far a Failure ? — As to Measures of the Nature of Means a Success — As to Measures of the Nature of Ends hitherto a FaUure — Testimony of Liberal CathoUcs to the one, and of Ultramontanes to the other — Apparatus of Means in Operation for the Ultimate End of Universal Dominion — Story of Scherr as an Example of the Minority — Differ ent Classes of those who " Submit " — Condition and Prospects of the Two Powers in Italy — Proximate Ends at present aimed at — Control of Elections — Of the Press — Of Schools — Problem of France and Italy — Power of the Priests for Disturbance — Com parison between Catholic and Non-Catholic Nations for last Sixty Years — Are Priests capable of fomenting Anarchical Plots ? — Hopes of Ultramontanes rest on France and England — The Former for Military Service, the Latter for Converts — This Hope Illusory 671 APPENDIX A The Syllabus with the Counter Propositions of Schrader . . . 713 APPENDIX B Relation of the Church to the Baptized, and especiaUy to Heretics . -733 APPENDIX C The Constitutions " Dei Filius " and " Pastor Mternus " . . 757 APPENDIX D The Pope personaUy preparing Children for War . ¦ ¦ 752 INDEX 753 BOOK I FROM THE ISSUE OF THE SYLLABUS TO ITS SOLEMN CONFIRMATION (December 1864 to June 1867) CHAPTER I The First Secret Command to commence Preparations for a General Council, December 6, 1864 — Meeting of Congregation — All but Cardinals sent out — Secret Order — Events of the 8th — Solemn Anniversary — A historical coup de soleil ON December 6, 1864, Pope Pius IX held in the Vatican a memorable meeting of the Congregation of Rites. That body consists of some eighteen or twenty cardinals, with a few prelates and a number of consulters. It holds a promi nent place among the congregations, or boards as they would be called at our Court, which, taken collectively, may be said to constitute the Roman Curia. It determines not only questions touching the canonization of saints, and the patron saints of towns and countries, but also questions touching relics, rubrics, and the title of sacred images to worship. The all-important matters of robes, adornments, and precedence, are said by different authorities to be regulated by it, and by the smaller Congregation of Ceremonies. The pontifical masters of the ceremonies have a seat at both boards. The day in question fell within three months after the sign ing of the convention of September, by which the new king dom of Italy had succeeded in binding Napoleon III to with draw his troops from the Papal States, at the close of 1866. It was, therefore, at a moment when thoughts were forcibly directed to the contingencies which might arise to the Papacy vol. 1. 1 1 2 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE should it be left alone with Italians. It was, moreover, only two days before the occurrence of an incident which has already grown into an event, and was designed to mark a new era in society at large. To that era the proceedings of the six years which we are about to trace were to form the introductory stage, up to a grand inauguration both legislative and cere monial. We have no information as to the business for which the meeting we speak of had been convened. It was, however, opened as usual by the reading of a prayer. After the prayer, the Pontiff commanded all who were not members of the Sacred College to withdraw, and leave him alone with the Cardinals. The excluded dignitaries interchanged conjectures as to what might be the cause of this unusual proceeding, and hoped that on their readmission they should be informed. But the Pope did not condescend to their curiosity ; they found that the Congregation only went on with the regular business, and when events cleared up the doubt it proved that not one of them had guessed the truth. In the short but eventful interval, Pius IX had formally communicated to the Cardinals his own persuasion, long cherished, and now quickened to the point of irrepressible action, that the remedy for the evils of the time would be found only in a General Council. He commanded them to study the expediency of convoking one, and to send to him in writing their opinions upon that question. The above incident is the first related in the sumptuous volume of Cecconi, written by command of the Pope, who, after it appeared, conferred on the author the archbishopric of Florence. That volume exclusively narrates the secret pro ceedings of the five years which intervened between this meet ing and the opening of the Vatican Council. But, while telling us what took place on December 6, the Court historian passes in dead silence over the eighth. On that day, however, the Vatican launched manifestoes which had been for years in preparation, and which have been mentioned every day since. These summed up all the past policy of Pius IX, and formed a A THREEFOLD TRIUMPH 3 basis for the future government of the world. They furnished to the Vatican Council, still five years distant, the kernel of its decrees, both those passed and those only presented. They are, in fact, printed with the Freiburg edition of its Acta as prepara tory documents. December is to Pius IX, as it is to the Bonapartes, a month of solemn anniversaries. On the eighth of that month, ten years previously to the time of which we are writing, surrounded by two hundred bishops, he proclaimed the immaculate con ception of the Virgin Mary as a doctrine of the Church. In his own imagination, this act formed an epoch of glory, to the lustre of which three distinct triumphs contributed. In the first place, a darling bye-belief was lifted from the humble posture of pious opinion, to that of a dogma binding on all, who must admit changes into their creed with every change of Rome. In the second place, a new and mighty advance in the power of the Papacy was achieved, for a formal addition to the creed was made without the sanction of a General Council. Those bishops who attended manifestly acted, not as members of a co-ordinate branch of a legislature, but as councillors of an autocrat. The absent were placed under the necessity of accepting the fait accompli, or of attempting to undo it in the face of the Pontiff, the Curia, and the majority of the prelates. " Gallicanism," said the Civiltd Cattolica, "was, in fact, bruised under the heel of the Immaculate, when Pius IX., by his own authority, laid down the definition."1 Thirdly, an impression of the personal inspiration of Pius IX was con veyed, with embellishments, so as to prepare the way for the recognition of his infallibility. When he was in the act of proclaiming the new dogma, the beams of the sun streamed gloriously upon him ; the fact being that his throne was so fixed that this must take place if the sun shone at the time. Nevertheless, the visible rays were hailed as evidence of the light which makes manifest things not seen. The Pope sought, in the great fresco of Podesti, to popularize 1 Serie VII, viii. p. 668. 4 -THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE and perpetuate his own conception of this event, which is called, in French guide-books to the Vatican, the coup de soleil his- torique. That picture, filling an entire side of a chamber, near to the renowned frescoes of Raffaele, represents the Virgin looking down from celestial glory upon Pius IX, and, by the hand of an angel, who holds a cross, pouring a stream of super nal light on his enraptured eye. Hence may the faithful gather that this is the light by which he reveals the truth to men. CHAPTER II The Encyclical Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864 — Causes ot Ruin of Modern Society : rejection of the " force " of the Church — Reh gious Equality — Pretensions of Civil Law and of Parents to Control Education — Laws of Mortmain — Remedies — Restoration of the Authority of the Church — Connecting Links between Encyclical and Syllabus — -Retrospect of Evidences that all Society was in Ruins — The Movement for Reconstruction THE tenth aniversary of the auspicious day of " The Immaculate" being now at hand, Pius IX had, as we have seen, chosen its fore-eve for setting in motion the preparations for his General Council. He reserved for the day itself the great de'ed of publishing the Encyclical Quanta Cura and its accompanying Syllabus of Errors. It is said that the inception of those documents dates back to a point not very long subsequent to the proclamation of the Immaculate Con ception, and that the first Special Congregation named to prepare them spent more than five years without agreeing, after which it was dissolved by his Holiness, and a second named, which completed the task. The key-note of the Encyclical is that of an alarm, in the martial sense ; not a panic cry, accompanied by a throw ing away of arms, but a note of danger, with a call to take them up. The cause assigned for alarm is the ruinous condition of society — that word being used in its political, not its domestic sense. The very bases of society were shaken by evil prin ciples, which had spread on all sides and raised a " horrible tempest." Before proceeding to the errors to be now con demned, the Pontiff is careful to connect with them those other " principal errors of our sad times " which he had already con demned in previous encyclicals, allocutions, and letters apostolic. He thus lays the logical foundation for the collection of them in 6 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE the Syllabus. He first reminds the bishops how he had stirred them up to war against these errors, and how he had also com manded the children of the Church to abhor and shun them. Secondly, he enumerates certain additional errors, condemns them in turn, and commands his sons to shun them likewise Condemnations pronounced in this formal manner are judicial and sovereign. The Pontiff does not speak as a mere teacher, but as the supreme tribunal of the Church. The judgments pronounced are not for the guidance of individuals merely, but are a rule for every officer of the Church. Every such sentence fixes the state of the law. After many generalities, the first token of ruin in modern society particularized is the design manifested to check and set aside the salutary force1 which ought always to be exercised by the Church, not only over individuals, but also over nations, both " peoples " and sovereigns. The second token of ruin is the prevalence of the error that the State may treat various religions on a footing of equality — the error that liberty of worship is in fact a personal right of every man, and that the citizen is entitled to make a free profession of his belief, orally or by the press, without fear of either civil or ecclesiastical power. This is condemned as being the " liberty of damnation." The next token of ruin is hostility to the religious orders, which were established by their founders only by the inspiration of God. Another token of ruin is the belief that all the rights of parents over their children arise out of civil law, especially the claim to control their education. The Pope would seem to think that this notion is the ground for denying the right of priests to take the control of education out of the hand of parents, or the ground for claiming the protection of civil law for the natural and Scriptural right of the parent against the alleged right of the priest. Such denial of the right of the priest is dilated upon as a further token of ruin. The existence 1 The word is vis, which both the Civiltd Cattolica and the French Recueil translate by " force." But not so the German Stimmen aus Maria Laach, which makes it " influence "• — einfluss (Heft i. p. io). Such a difference in versions meant for Germans, Englishmen, and Americans is not rare. RUINOUS STATE OF SOCIETY 7 of laws of mortmain is an additional token. After these civil and ecclesiastical matters, one theological point is adduced, with formal yet fervent language, as if it were some new plague, broken out in our own times — the denial of the divinity of our blessed Lord. This seems to be the only question in theology proper directly raised in the document. The errors now signal ized are all condemned, and formally added to those previously condemned. Just as the Emperor Nicholas of Russia, before undertaking the campaign that led to the Crimean war, found his sick man and pointed out his symptoms, so had Pius IX done. In the former case, the sick man was only one wide-spread but despotic empire. In the latter, it included everything that could be called, in the dialect of the Vatican, the Modern State. Proceeding from his enumeration of the evils which mark the ruin of contemporary society to the remedies by which it is to be repaired, his Holiness once more wraps up much of what he may mean in generalities. When he does come to particulars, the hierarchy are directed to teach that kingdoms rest on the foundations of the faith ; that kingly power is bestowed, not only for the government of the world, but still more for the protection of the Church ; that nothing can be more glorious for rulers than to permit the Catholic Church to govern accord ing to her own laws (i.e. canon law), not allowing any one to impede her free action, and not setting the regal will above that of the priests of Christ. Here is touched the great question in government. The Modern State had not only emancipated the throne from the supreme tribunal of the Church, that is, the Pope, but it had also emancipated the civil courts from the external tribunal of the Church, that is, the ecclesiastical court. The latter as well as the former evil must be redressed. To such prescriptions for the healing of society is added a procla mation of indulgences, and then follows an exhortation to pray both to God and to the Blessed Virgin, " who has de stroyed all heresies throughout the world "—whatever that may mean in history, theology, or rhetoric. " She is gentle and full of mercy ; . . ., and standing at the right hand of her only Son, 8 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE our Lord Jesus Christ, as queen, in gilded clothing, surrounded with variety, there is nothing which she cannot obtain from Him." This curious document was a necessary introduction to the Syllabus. The external connecting link between the two was formed by a covering letter of Cardinal Antonelli conveying the Syllabus to the hierarchy by direct command of the Pope, " that they might have all the errors and the pernicious doc trines which have been condemned by him under their eyes." 1 The internal link lay in the title of the Syllabus, which recited the language of the Encyclical referring to the antecedent judg ments of the Pontiff. It is not a syllabus of errors in general, nor of errors merely disapproved and abhorred by Pius IX in par ticular, nor of errors rebuked and denounced by him only in sermons, speeches, or briefs ; but a syllabus of The Principal Errors of our Times, set forth by him in Consistorial Allocutions, Encyclicals, and other Letters Apostolic. Before proceeding to consider the Syllabus as the new foundation laid for thelreconstruction of society after its ruin, we may for a moment glance at the facts which might seem taj prove to observers, looking from the Vatican, that it had been reduced to a ruinous condition. Coming to the throne in 1846, Pius IX inherited the sove reignty of States which had long been in a condition of chronic disaffection. The state of things is described as follows by Monsignor Liverani, a learned but seemingly disappointed prelate, who wrote hoping to redeem the glory of the Papacy by the re-establishment of a Holy Roman Empire with an Italian head, after the example of that interval between the line of Charlemagne and that of Otho, when Guido of Spoleto, his brilliant son Lambert, and Berengarius wore the imperial title. " The people," says Liverani, " have spoken for forty years, groaning, agitating, shaking off the yoke by frequent revolu tions, accompanied by crimes and continuous misfortunes, by slaughters, wars, bombardments, banishments, and desola tions." 2 1 Recueil, end of preface. 2 // Papato, etc., p. 188 RUINOUS STATE OF SOCIETY 9 Nevertheless, prelates from the north, coming to pay their homage to the new Pontiff, on reaching the last spurs of the Alps, might embrace in the glance of their mind all thence to _Etna, and say, Happy land ! the throne of his Holiness in the centre, the faithful Bourbon on the south, the Hapsburg on the north, with Tuscany under a branch of the Hapsburgs, and Piedmont under the House of Savoy — what a spectacle of Catholic power ! Holy land ! not a heretic temple ; not one teacher but in communion with Peter : blessed scene of Catholic unity ! A poor representative of the oft-extirpated Waldenses might say in silence — for such words durst not then disturb the Catholic unity of Italian air — You forget a few teachers in the valleys behind you, who never left the word of God to turn lords either of the earth or of the faith. Before you there is not a pulpit with the Bible, nor a man who ever drinks the cup of Christ, excepting priests alone ; not a temple with God's com mandments on its walls, but many a decalogue altered by the authority of a man who, making the law of God reformable, claims that his own shall be irref ormable ! Beyond the limits of the Pope's temporal dominions soon arose commotions which spread over the principal seats of his spiritual power. In Switzerland the Jesuits provoked the war of the Sonderbund, and were foiled. Beyond the Atlantic a considerable portion of Mexico passed into the hands of the Protestant United States. Portugal was plagued with revolt. A famine thinned and dispersed the Roman Catholic population of Ireland. France drove away her good king. The Emperor of Austria was compelled to abdicate, and the empire was not saved from dismemberment without aid from Russia. The King of Bavaria also had to lay down his crown. The sovereigns of Tuscany and Naples were compelled to fly ; as was, alas ! the Pontiff himself. Spain and her Queen were seldom heard of, except for an insurrection or a scandal. Only two Roman Catholic countries were thriving— Belgium, with a Protestant king, and a constitution which the Church had solemnly and vehemently condemned; and Piedmont, which, worse than io THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Hannibal, had opened the passes of the Alps to religious liberty. This was the first sweep of the hurricane. During its preva lence, those portions of the world which lay without the Papal circle enjoyed as much rest as was to be looked for beside such troubled waters. Both schismatical Russia and heretical England were stable and expanding. Prussia was for a time seriously disturbed, but, nevertheless, was manifestly advancing to the first place in Germany. Holland, Denmark, and Sweden held on their way ; and the United States were growing apace. From his exile the Pope called on the Catholic powers for armed aid. Austria crushed and held the Emilia. Spain took Fuimicino and the cities on the Tyrrhenian shore. Naples con quered Frosinone and the south up to Palestrina, but was driven back at Velletri by Garibaldi. Finally, France declared herself ready to terminate the war ; and, after failing for weeks before the slight defences of Rome, ultimately took the city.1 Indebted for a welcome restoration to the unwelcome hand of a Bonaparte, Pius IX, on re-entering his States, found himself permanently dependent for possession of the capital on the sword of France, and for that of the provinces on the sword of Austria. Under their protection he enjoyed some years of struggling sovereignty. This could hardly be called a restora tion of the temporal power, for a power is not really restored till it can again stand alone. Instead of being an opponent of the Jesuits, a Liberal, and a Reformer, as he had been, the Pope was now transformed into a violent reactionary, and had fallen entirely under the influence of the Jesuits. His admirers proudly point to his acts from that time forward as evidence that they have been uniformly aimed at one end. That end, viewed on its negative side, they call combating the Revolution, 1 The Pope, in the Allocution of April 20, 1849, says that Spain first stirred up the other Catholic nations to form a league among them selves for his restoration (Recueil, p. 228). His description of the Holy City during his absence was, " a thicket of roaring beasts " — silvam frementium besliarum (Id. 224). His description of himself at the same time was " being counted worthy to suffer shame for the name of Jesus, and being made in some measure conformable to His passion " (14. p. 234). THE MOVEMENT FOR RECONSTRUCTION n and, viewed on its positive side, the reconstruction of society. In the introduction to his Speeches, his peculiar mission is said to be that of reconstruction. This reconstruction was to begin with the restoration of ideas, and was to proceed to the restora tion of facts. It is this movement that we are about to trace. First, we shall take a brief retrospect from the time of its inception at Gaeta up to the appearance of the Syllabus, which, as the ostensible ground-plan of a cosmopolitan code, was meant to be the charter of reconstruction. We shall then, from that stage onward, as far as our materials enable us, detail the progressive steps of the movement up to the end of the Vatican Council, which was meant to complete the constituent arrangements of the new theocratic monarchy. We shall see unfolding a move ment for dominion as distinctive as was that of Leo III when he linked the fortunes of the Papacy to those of a new Western Empire ; as distinctive as was the movement of Hildebrand when from political dependence he lifted up the Papacy to unheard-of domination ; as distinctive as was the movement of the Popes after the Reformation, when through war and the Inquisition they restored in several countries of Europe their spiritual ascendancy. We shall witness the rise of a curious and powerful literature — scholastic, serial, and popular — which has steadily swollen in volume, and now acts with ever accelerating force on the religious antipathies of many nations, pointing to future wars on a scale unheard of, fixing the aim of those wars, and hinting at the disappearance of all existing institutions but the Church. We shall see a well-sustained endeavour, in the name of freedom of instruction, to take all schools and universities out of the hands of parents and of States, and to put them into the hands of priests. We shall see such rights in matters ecclesiastical as in the Church of Rome had still survived to the laity, the priests, and the bishops, gradually suppressed in action till the way was prepared for their abolition in law. We shall see the subordination of the civil law to the canon law, and the subjection of the civil magistrate to the " ecclesiastical magis trate " insisted upon as the essence of social order. We shall 12 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE see all the inherited rights of kings and rulers, within their own dominions, to put limits upon the action of the Pope of Rome, first impugned, then contested, then defied, and finally, as far as the Church could do it, legislated out of existence. We shall see all kings and rulers challenged to accept the Pontiff as their head, and even as their judge in all matters involving moral responsibility. We shall find it taught and taught again that all Catholic countries have two rulers— the universal and the national one, the universal one superior, the national one subordinate ; and that every citizen of those countries is more the subject of the Pope than of his prince. We shall see the relation between the civil and the ecclesiastical authorities as existing within the Papal States solemnly and repeatedly declared to be the normal relation of those two orders of authority, and to be the only example of their proper relative position extant in all the earth. We shall see the Papal States earnestly held up as the model for the new theocracy in the entire world. Further, we shall see, for five successive years, secret pro ceedings of the Court of Rome sufficiently laid open by official divulgence to enable us to note the slow, sure steps devised for depriving kings of all their rights in self-defence against the Pope ; for depriving bishops of all their powers of checking or restraining the Pope ; for depriving theologians of any voice in the councils of the Church ; and for depriving the parochial clergy of their individual and collective franchises. We shall at almost every turn hear modern laws and constitutions — liberty of worship, liberty of the press, liberty of meeting, with representative legislatures and responsible governments — denounced as the curse of mankind in all the varying accents of a strange dialect, or a dialect happily strange to us. We shall witness the preaching of a new crusade, on a cosmopolitan scale, with considerable art, making the bearing of arms for St. Peter to appear, pre-eminently, the life of the Cross, and dying in arms for St. Peter to appear as the martyr's end, the fairest of deaths, and the most enviable. We shall see how the most jealous and obstinate oligarchy in the world were led on from COURSE OF THE MOVEMENT 13 step to step of subjugation till they were made the instruments of reducing their collective body, when in Council assembled, from a co-ordinate branch of a legislature to a mere privy council to the Bishop of Rome, and of reducing the members of their body, when dispersed, from the position of real diocesan bishops to that of prefects of the Bishop of Rome. Still further, we shall see evolved under our eyes the process by which opinions are elevated into doctrines, and doctrines are erected into irreformable dogma. We shall see how the bishops, while dispersed, were induced, in order to facilitate the making of a new dogma, to discredit their acknowledged standard of belief, tradition, substituting for it the general consent of the Church ; and how, when the passing of the dogma was secured, the assembled bishops were induced to disavow the consent of the Church as unnecessary. We shall see ecclesiastical mag nates prostrate and petitioning the Bishop of Rome for the elementary liberties of a legislature, and petitioning in vain. We shall see how such magnates in secret petitions represented the principles about to be erected into dogma as contrary to their traditional belief and constant teaching, as fraught with peril to the State, and as certain to bring discredit on the loyalty of any sincere believer in such dogma ; and how the same magnates afterwards in public documents affirmed the opposite in all these respects. We shall see how renowned champions of the Papacy complained late in life that they had been used for its glory and deceived as to its principles . Finally, we shall see set in motion an immense apparatus of means for effecting, in a course of ages, the complete social, political, and ecclesiastical reconstruction of all society, which recon struction will culminate only when the spiritual and the temporal powers meeting as in an apex in the Vicar of Christ, he shall be by all men regarded as not only High Priest, but as King of kings and Lord of lords ; when, all authority and dominion, all principality and power, being put under him, there shall in the whole earth exist only, as we should express it, one master and all men slaves, or, as he would express it, one fold and one shepherd. CHAPTER III Foundation of a Literature of Reconstruction, Serial and Scholastic — The Civiltd Cattolica : its Views on Education and on Church and State— Tarquini's Political Principles of Pope and King — Measures Preparatory to the Syllabus WITH the year 1850 was commenced a magazine, at the instance of the Jesuits, and under their direction, bear ing the title Catholic Civilization (Civiltd Cattolica), in oppo sition to modern civilization. We may here say that the daily organ of the same complexion bears the title of Catholic Unity (Unitd Cattolica), in opposition to Italian unity. Above one hundred volumes of the Civiltd have been published ; and it must ever be named in connexion with Pius IX as the intimate organ of his policy, and the most complete store of his pub lished records. Perhaps its place in the history of literature is unique. Considering the number of books, serials, and jour nals, in different languages, of which it is the inspiring force, and considering the modifications it has already succeeded in bringing about in the ideas and even in the organization of the whole Catholic society, they can scarcely be charged with vain boasting who call it the most influential organ in the world. The Jesuit Fathers forming its editorial staff reside close to the Pope's palace, and work under his immediate direction. Dr. Friedrich, during the Vatican Council, told some bishops that if they would understand the Council, they must study it with the Civiltd in their hands. For our part, before reading that remark we had applied the same principle to the entire move ment. The leading idea of the Civiltd is expressed, says the article on the programme, in its title. Catholic Civilization is flag, device, and profession of faith.1 The substance is civilization, 1 Civiltd, vol. 1. p. 13. THE LITERATURE OF RECONSTRUCTION 15 the quality Catholic. Civilization is not polish, but organization in community, under rule. Civilization, after the Catholic ideal, had continued steadily to grow up to the fifteenth cen tury, but was broken in the sixteenth by Lutheranism ; was again enfeebled in the seventeenth by Jansenism ; yet again was it undermined in the eighteenth by Voltairianism, and now in the nineteenth it is lacerated by Socialism. The evil has actually entered Italy, and even heterodoxy itself threatens to invade the Peninsula. Heresy is, in fact, likely to become connected with that aspiration after national unity by which the people are misled. Almost everything having been over hauled in heterodox spirit, almost everything must be re constituted from the foundation.1 These words express the mission of the new periodical, and of the restored Papacy. They are the original announcement of a policy ever since pursued without flagging. To reconstitute society according to the Catholic ideal is the single object set forth. " On the brink of social dissolution," the one necessity felt, pressed, reiterated, is that of re-establish ing on the Catholic ideal the notion of civilization — that is of the civil system ; and of leading back the movement of civiliza tion to that Catholic ideal from which it had been departing for three centuries .2 The essential point in this fabric is " the idea of authority." But the idea of authority cannot be restored except by quicken ing it, and reinforcing it by the Catholic conception. When the divine authority was shaken, men would no longer hear of the human (i.e. when the Papacy was rejected, civil govern ment fell into contempt). The Catholic ideal is idly reproached with absolutism. But, among Catholics, pure monarchy, if not limited by certain conventional checks, is tempered by a higher law, not abstract, but practical, active, and operative. Absolutism in the sense of despotism is the creation of Protes tantism and Voltairianism, and if it may sit on the throne of a king, it is more frequently found in constitutional chambers or democratic assemblies.3 Therefore the one sufficing remedy 1 Ibid. p. 15. 2 Ibid. p. 13. s Ibid. pp. 20, 21, 16 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE is the restoration in ruler and subject of the notion of authority according to the Catholic ideal. For this the new organ calls for a salutary conspiracy, a holy crusade ; *• two phrases that mean all that has since taken place, and all that has yet to come. The very first article of the Civiltd, after that upon the pro gramme, is on education : " the question which holds all the future destinies of the European nations struggling within its ballot-boxes." With this appreciation of its theme, it takes ground which has since become familiar to Europe, and enun ciates principles which have now frequently been reproduced in our own discussions ; so that a slight sketch of its reasoning will not be without interest to Enghsh readers. The interest is increased by the fact that its aims have steadily gained ground in France. In England, some of them, if not recognized as principles, have been, to a considerable extent, practically embodied, as undetected principles are apt to be. Beginning with the theme of Freedom of Instruction, it denounces the tyranny and monopoly of the University of France. Had not the spirit of Catholicism, it says, broken the chain, it would soon have become unlawful for one man to tell another the right road, unless he had a bachelor's degree, for doing so was a sort of instruction. The line properly limit ing freedom of instruction it finds in the line which divides the truth from falsehood. They who demand liberty of in struction do so in order to teach the truth. But in excluding the teaching of lies, it may be even " necessary to protect children betrayed by the barbarous apathy of their parents." The writer then asks, But who is to determine what is the lie ? Governments ? " Until a government can show itself infallible, it must renounce all pretensions to regulate instruc tion and opinion." The pretension on its part to do so is tyrannical, because interference here is trespassing on the sanctuary, where the truth alone bears rule. The position that it belongs to a government to fix the limits of freedom of opinion is denounced as having originated 1 Ibid. p. 14. THE STATE AND MORAL EDUCATION 17 in the Reformation, as being Protestant, and, further, as being destitute of foundation. The Church is the moderator of instruction, precisely because she is the infallible moderator of opinions in all that relates to the moral order. Consequently there is in existence a competent, effectual, and revered tribunal. Then follow taunts at journals which complain of communal authorities for giving up their educational rights to the clergy. These are succeeded by jeers at such statesmen as doubt if the liberty of communal authorities extends so far as to give them the right of surrendering their liberty. The objection is then faced, that liberty may be as justly claimed by the non-Catholic as by the Catholic. Of course, replies the Civiltd, the only case in which that question can become a practical one for Catholics is where they form the majority. Is it to be supposed that a majority shall be bound, for the sake of a minority " to pass a law opening all the pits of hell for its fellow-citizens ? ... With Catholics the liberty of dissidents cannot be a natural right." The position taken by statesmen, that the Church is not infallible in politics and economy, and that therefore these sub jects must be under the control of the State, is first laughed at. It reminds the writer of a musketeer who should say to his general, " I see that your artillery is of no avail against these Alps ; let us open upon them with our rifles." After this comes the principle. The assertion that politics and economy ought to be under the control of the State rests on one or other of three errors : (1) Politics and economy do not belong to the moral sciences ; or, (2) The moral sciences are not subject to moral laws ; or, (3) The Church is not the authentic exponent of moral law. The first of these errors is refuted by every university in Europe, in all of which politics and economy are classed among the moral sciences. The second is a contra diction in terms. The third is a heresy in every Catholic ear. It will help to a clear understanding of many expressions which must occur hereafter, if the reader, at this stage, will set before his mind's eye the scope of the three principles here asserted. Phillips, a modern lay doctor, quoted by the VOL. I. 2 1 8 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE humblest polemic and the mighty Civiltd, in his seven volumes on ecclesiastical law (Kirchenrecht), discusses the relations of Church and State at great length. He shows that the Church is supreme and the State subordinate, in all things that come under the divine laws. Holtgreven, a Catholic judge, and an opponent of the Falk laws, explains this clearly : " To the divine laws, in this sense, belong, not only the ten command ments, but also the canons of the Church, as the Council of Trent shows. The things subject to the divine laws include all such worldly things as are connected with morality." x This much is conceded by the Civiltd, that, if danger to the public interests should arise from false teaching of any material science, the government may interfere, as it would in a case of adulteration of food. The Church is not infallible in material instruction. The article, it will be seen, claims the right to take the teach ing of the child out of the hand of the parent, and that of the subject out of the hand of the State.2 The latter may mix itself up in the matter as to material things, not as to moral. Royal supremacy, in university, college, seminary, or primary school, must not be allowed. It has the twofold evil of setting the authority and responsibility of the parent for his child above that of the priest, and of setting the local authority of the national ruler above the all-embracing authority of the universal one. The State is not only welcome to appear in school, but ought to appear in its subordinate capacity, finding money, secular status, and instruction in material things. But in all that part of schooling which may be called education in the higher sense, of a father, a Christian, or a king, the State is not to have a word to say. It would seem difficult to ask a community to do an action involving a more serious disregard of moral considerations than to find money and power for schools and colleges, and not have a word to say as to the principles taught in them. We are far from ascribing such a disregard of moral considerations to a devout Ultramontane. On the contrary, he is persuaded *¦ Holtgreven, p. 9. 2 Civiltd, vol. i. pp. 25-51. COMPREHENSIVENESS OF THE CHURCH 19 that the State, in committing its money and authority to the Church, takes not only the highest human guarantee, but a truly divine one, for the protection of every moral interest. The motto of the article is a sentence intimating that, all over Europe, the question of the future must be the establishment of universities canonically instituted.1 In order to the restoration of ideas now undertaken, as pre paring the way for the restoration of facts, it was a practical necessity to establish an invariable association between the two ideas of the only Judge of true and false, the only Arbiter of right and wrong, and the one holy Roman Church. This asso ciation could not be established so well by any arrangement as by making each school an arena on which every day the authority of both the parent and the State should be — not pranced upon, not even trampled upon, but serenely and devoutly walked over, by what M. Veuillot calls the crushing sandals of the monk. Another article in the first volume of the Civiltd give's such expression to the principles which underlie the whole struggle ever since conducted, that some account of it will do more to put the reader in possession of certain of those principles than formal explanations. It is on the central question of the relations of Church and State ; or, as the Civiltd puts it, of the separation of Church and State — a phrase which, like almost every other, has a different meaning in its pages from what it has with us. The following headings give an idea of the drift of the article : " 6. The nation is a part of the Church." " 7. The part ought to be subordinate to the whole." " 8. Because the Church has authority." " 9. The authority of jurisdiction." 2 I believe in the holy Catholic Church, in the Apostles' Creed, is thus interpreted : " I believe that every Catholic individual and nation forms a part of the Catholic society, and that only by virtue of its being a part does it partake of the benefit of the whole, through being subordinated to the laws of the whole." 1 Ibid. 2 Vol. i. p. 647. 20 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE On the point of jurisdiction, the writer first unearths " the serpent," which is the notion that the Church may judge about sins, virtues, doctrines, rites, and such-like, but must not touch temporal jurisdiction. This serpent he proceeds to kill. First, he solemnly appeals to the faith of the reader. " Do you believe that the Church is infallible in dogmatic Bulls, at least, unless they are formally rejected by the episcopate ? " After this, he resorts to pleasantry : " Come close to me, and I will tell it in your ear. The Bull of John XXII condemned John Gianduno and Marsilius of Padua as heretics, because they denied to the Church the right of punishing by corporal pains, and it declared that she could inflict pains even unto death.1 But I tell you this in secret, solely that you may know what is the doctrine of the Catholic Church, which you profess— doctrine put in practice through very many centuries, down to the last Council (Trent), which fulminated I know not how many penalties, and material ones, even against counts, marquises, princes, and emperors. Woe to us if they should hear us ! " Thus jauntily did those who had only just been reinstated by foreign arms treat the neo-Catholic doctrine, or, as it has since been called, the Liberal Catholic one. " I tell you plainly," adds the writer, " that if the Church cannot rule her sons, even in material things, the Church is lost ; at least, the Catholic Church. She might survive as that invisible Church which was discovered by Luther among the ruins of the middle ages, and, reconstructed as the amphitherium and palceotherium, were discovered in the geological strata, and reconstructed by Cuvier." Addressing kings, the writer solemnly counsels them to bring 1 Cardinal Tarquini (Jnstitutiones, p. 35, ed. 4th), whom Cardinal Manning, in his reply to Mr. Gladstone (p. 94), names as teaching differ ently on such points from the earlier Jesuits, Bellarmine and Suarez, quotes this case, saying that the Bull in question " more particularly attributes to the Church that which is the special property of a perfect society, the power of coercion, even to the use of material force ; but Marsilius, who denied this, was on that account condemned as a heretic." His words are, " Quod maxime proprium est societatis perfected, jus potestatis coactivcn etiam quoad inferendam vim materialem ; Marsilius autem, qui hese ipsa negabat damnatur eam ob rem ut heereticus." A CONTRAST IN POLITICS 21 forth all their codes, and pass them under a careful examination. But the light by which such examination is to be conducted must be that " of pure Catholicism, to which all other legis lation must be subordinated. Restore every article of your code, according to the articles of your creed, not only in what relates to the duties of subjects, but also in what would seem to diminish the rights of rulers. And that the Catholic in fluence, which modifies codes, may shine in all its fulness, let it not be ministers or legists, but bishops and the Pontiff, who shall minutely search into your legislation for every anti-Catholic element." The theocratic Papal polity might have been almost inten tionally framed to contrast with the first principles of the Mosaic theocratic polity. The latter, put in one word, seems to be this : God as the general Father is the great right-holder, and He identifies the rights of every creature with His own, identifying at the same time their welfare with His own glory. Therefore He leaves no creature to the care of a Vicar, no province to any departmental divinity. Every act done for the benefit of our fellow-creatures He reckons as a tribute to Himself. Every infringement of their rights He treats as an offence against Himself. Every man was taught to see, not an abstract principle, but a great Father standing beside the gleaning widow, the supperless hireling, the pauper forced to pawn, and having no second coat — was taught to hear this common Father saying for these to happier neighbours, " I am the Lord." Every man tempted to lie, cheat, steal, oppress, seduce, or strike, saw the same great Father rising up against him, and saying, " I am the Lord." It was of the essence of this theocracy that all who held authority did so by and under a written law in the vulgar tongue. Of this law every father in his own house was made the guardian, and in it he was the responsible instructor of his children. Every prophet professing that he bore a fresh mes sage was to be brought to the test of this written law. Those who were to apply the test were the men of the whole community. Every one who claimed to bear a special commission was bound 22 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE first to conform to the law, and secondly, to show signs of special divine power. It was a the'ocracy of direct divine government, not of government by a Vicar ; a theocracy of written law, not of arbitrary will styling itself authority ; a theocracy of private judgment, not of a veda shut up from the low caste, to be read and interpreted only by the twice-born Brahman. Finally, it was a theocracy in which whatever came from God became its own witness by benefits to God's children not to be mistaken, and obvious to all. The statement made in the Civiltd as to the guidance under which the reactionary policy in Austria was devised, gives light upon the duties then engrossing nuncios and confessors at the various Courts where Papal influence was powerful. All that appeared to the world was, that at every one of those Courts a cold current of reaction set in and ran strong. The Jesuits took it for a tide, and the bark of St. Peter was to sail cheerily over all the shoals. But the Liberal Catholics were proportion- ably disquieted as to the prospects of the Church. The first days of Pius IX had fired them with hope that Rome might r-yet be fit to face three things of which she was shy — the 1 Bible, History, and Freedom. But the advent of the Jesuits to power caused serious forebodings, which soon began to be realized. To quote the memorable words of Montalembert " Who could have thought that the clergy, after crying out for liberty in Belgium, would turn round as they did in 1852, till we found them beating down all our liberties and privileges — in fact, all our ideas — as held in times preceding Napoleon III ? " s We now find that at the time when the Pontiff was using his clergy to help kings in taking away constitutional rights from their subjects, he was himself preparing to take from the kings what they indeed looked upon as rights, but what he regarded in the light of constitutional concessions, infringing the higher rights of their divinely appointed suzerain. When the Italian government took possession of the Collegio Romano, it was found that the Jesuits had left in the great library of the 1 Letter quoted in Unitd Cattolica, March 10, 1870. priedbergh, p. 120, NO ROYAL PLACET 23 establishment little belonging to the present pontificate. One pamphlet is of some significance. A manuscript note on the title-page proudly tells how his Holiness wished to have it cir culated as widely as possible. It also adds that on February 1, 1853, when the fathers of the Collegio Romano stood before his Holiness, he singled out the author, Father Camillo Tarquini, in presence of the other Jesuits and of the Court, and addressed him thus : " Father Tarquini, I am delighted ; bravo ! well done ! I confirm it, and confirm it with all my heart." 1 This was an early foretoken of the purple in which Tarquini died. He is the writer to whom Cardinal Manning appeals, as soften ing the doctrine crf^Beltarmine )ind Suarez to p. temper fitter for our times. Th^-pafflph__e*t sighalizsd-by^this display of favour aims at proving the wickedness of kings in subjecting the bulls, briefs, or any acts whatever of the Pope, to a placet, exequatur, or other form of royal assent, before recognizing them as having the force of law in their States. This is one form of the error of regalism. The power of the Pontiff, argues Father Tarquini, is this — What he binds on earth is bound in heaven. But if the king, stepping in, says, To bind imphes the force of law, and your acts shall not acquire the force of law without my placet, how then ? Why, the Pontiff becomes the one really bpund. The king refuses to allow the pontifical judgments to take effect of themselves. It is not with him " said on earth and done in heaven." His placet must intervene. It is competent, indeed, he admits to the Pontiff, to grant a right of placet ; but such a right, founded on the grace of a Pope, cannot be confounded with one inherent in the crown. We quote the following in full : — " You say that the placet is 1 Del Regio Placet : Dissertazione del P. CamUlo Tarquini, D.C.D.G. . . . Estratto dagli Annali delle Scienze ReUgiose, Roma, 1852. Tipografia della Rev. Cam. ApostoUca. The note in manuscript on the title-page is as foUows : " S. S. Pio IX Voile che presente dissertazione si diffondesse quanto piu si potea ; e nel di, 1 Febbrajo, 1853, veduto l'autore dissegli aUa presenza deUa sua corte e degli altri Padri del Collegio Romano. P. Tarquini me rallegro, bravo, bene. Confermo, e conferroo di tutta volonta," 24 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE a real right, demanded by justice, and essential to political government. The Church condemns it by a series of judgments, perhaps without parallel in her history, extending from her foundation down tq Pius IX. She expressly defines it, with Leo X, Clement VII, Clement XI, and Benedict XIV, as opposed to all justice, as indecent, absurd, rash, scandalous, as insufferable depravity, and worthy of eternal pain. There fore she punishes it with the greatest of penalties, the anathema. " In this matter there is no middle course. You must either lay aside the mask of Catholicism, which no longer becomes you, and boldly avow that the Church has defined good as evil, justice as injustice, an inherent right of the crown as an absur dity and a wrong, and done so in a judgment perpetuated from her foundation to our own day ; or you must, on the other hand, confess that you are in an error not to be tolerated." Thus it seems that what with a Christian minister would only be a claim to announce the belief and the moral precepts which he found in the Holy Scriptures, becomes with the Roman Pontiff a claim to put his decree on any matter which he deems conducive to the good of " the Church " into the form of law, and to set it up without, or in spite of, but anyhow above, the national law, be it republican, royal, or imperial. This bound less pretension — for boundless it is — will often be found gently expressed as the right of the Pontiff to communicate with the faithful. The writer then asks what, from his point of view, would seem to be a natural question. Would kings like the Pope to demand that his placet should be required before their laws came into force ? * He replies that some of them have so far unlearned " Christian doctrine as to say that, in case the Pope did so, he would usurp sovereign rights in their States." But such a proposition is heretical, pronounced to be so by the Holy Office in 1654, with the approbation of Innocent X.2 By virtue 1 " It would be very natural that the Church which makes laws from God Himself should demand of the State that it should make no law for her subjects to which she had not previously given her approbation." — Phillips, ii. 577. « " In 1644, the Holy Office, in a decree approved by Innocent X, WHAT IS RELIGIOUS LIBERTY? 25 of this, even our children know that the Church presided over and governed by the Vicar of Christ is a kingdom which has the ends of the earth for its bounds. Therefore it belongs to the Vicar of Christ to make laws in all parts of the world for her welfare and for her government." Liberal Catholics trembled for the consequences to Church and State of Jesuit Court confessors and far-aiming but short- seeing plans. They knew that the devout Jesuit calls upon all to regard the Papal government as the model for the whole world ; and that if statesmen and jurists could be replaced by Jesuits at the various Courts, a combination of plan and an unity of action might be secured everywhere for a great movement to establish the dominion of Christ in a higher degree than the Thirty Years' War did in Austria and Bohemia. There is a point illustrated in this pamphlet which seems to enter into the English head more slowly than any other. We mean the conscientious view of a true Ultramontane as to what constitutes religious hberty, or violates it. Englishmen some times not only transfer their own views on this subject to Ultramontanes, but betray the feeling that they are generous in doing so. It is never generous, or even just, to ascribe views to a man which he religiously condemns. If the Englishman will clearly set before his mind the first postulate of the Ultra montane, that God has appointed a vicar upon earth, to whom He has committed all power, surely he will see that religious liberty must principally consist in the freedom of that vicar to do all which he conceives it to be in his province to do, and in the freedom of those who receive his commands to carry them out, exactly according to his intentions. If any king or nation limits his freedom to act and command, " the Pope becomes the one really bound." The Englishman may say that, on this principle, no guarantee is left for any liberty but that of the condemned as schismatical and heretical the proposition which asserts that, when the Pontiffs promulge their decrees in places subject to the dominion of other temporal princes, they promulge laws in territories that are not theirs. "—Civiltd, Serie VII. vol, vi. p. 292. Tarquini says J654 (Inst., p. 159), the Civiltd 1644. 26 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Pontiff, or of those who represent authority derived from him. But that is precisely what the Ultramontane does not believe. On the contrary, he holds that the highest guarantee for all legitimate liberty lies in the complete freedom of the Pontiff. No liberty can be legitimate that consists in exemption, or assumed exemption, from divine authority. And further, the authority of the Vicar of God, being exercised under unfailing guidance, is not liable to commit violations of any right. We thus see begun the movement for the restoration of ideas, as preparatory to the restoration of facts. Ranke has traced the course of the "ecclesiastical restoration," which was rendered necessary by the damage inflicted on Rome by the Reformation, without being careful to mark the principles or to track the processes by which " restoration " was effected in Bohemia, Austria, Spain, Italy, and France. That restoration, however, had been real and momentous. A second restoration had taken place after the wreck of the French Revolution, when the Papacy had been smitten by its own sons. It was the pride of the clergy to cite the fact that the rulers of England and Prussia had co-operated in that restoration, as proof that the Papal throne was even in Protestant eyes the central point of order. Now a third restoration was to be effected — one which would do all that had been left undone by the other two. The Pope's throne was not only to be reared up again in Rome, but was to be graduaUy elevated to a spiritual supremacy equal to the highest claimed in former Bulls, and to a temporal supremacy as complete as when Hildebrand triumphed at Canossa. The first of these restorations had been fought out with the weapons of the Inquisition and the war-plots of the Jesuits. The second had been fought out with the weapons of the Liberal Catholics, borrowed from the Reformation and the Modern State. When the Jesuits had pushed, not too far, but untimely far, they were for the day disowned ; not, however, as inimical to the Church, but as hateful to the nations, and as, therefore, lowering the credit of the Church with the outside world. Now had come the moment when the Liberal Catholics. FATE OF THE LIBERAL CATHOLICS 27 having done their work, were in turn to be disowned ; but on other grounds. They were to be cast out as children of the world, infected with principles subversive of the " kingdom of God," of that polity in which the priest of God is the king of men, and the affairs of an erring race are unerringly guided by consecrated hands. CHAPTER IV Measures preparatory to the Syllabus — Changes in Italy since 184(5 — Progress of Adverse Events — A Commination of Liberties — A Second Assembly of Bishops without Parliamentary Functions — The Curse on Italy— Origin of the phrase " A Free Church in a Free State " — Projected Universal Monarchy BEING notoriously deficient in theological training, Pius IX was not unnaturally seized with a desire to reduce the rebel nations by raising contested doctrines to the rank of dogmas. When the reactionary movement in politics had attained its full momentum, he called an as sembly of bishops, whose splendour, surrounding his throne, might restore to it some of the departed prestige. At the same time, summoning the bishops for consultation and for ceremonial purposes, but not at all for parliamentary ones, would be a secure step of progress in the absorption of the power of the collective episcopate into the Papacy. In the midst of two hundred prelates, as we have already seen, he proclaimed the Immaculate Conception, in 1854. As a display of absolute authority in the highest realm, that of dogma, this act did more to advance the proper ideas than an immensity of writing. We have already quoted the assertion that it crushed Gallicanism. But ideas were only stepping-stones to facts. Professor Michelis asserts that even during the gathering of 1854 an attempt was made in some large assembly of bishops to induce them to proclaim Papal infallibility as a Catholic dogma.1 The prelates, who, on their way to Rome in 1846, had looked with joy on the spectacle of unity, now found that spectacle slightly blemished. One heretic temple stood in Turin — a proof that after all the extirpations of the Waldenses, 1 Kurze Geschichte des Vaticanischen Concils, p. 9. 88 ADVERSE PROGRESS OF EVENTS 29 a root had still lurked in the ground, This temple had no images, and had the Bible in mother-tongue. It bore out side, in words that any cowherd might read, if he could read at all, a verse of Jeremiah : " Stand ye in the ways and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls." And this was not only suffered, but done by the House of Savoy ! - As the prelates went south, whispers might reach some of them that in Tuscany the police, now and then, discovered secret bands of Bible-readers, somewhat as in old times the Lollards were unearthed in England. The historical name of Guicciardini was implicated in the offence, and a number of vulgar people. Even at Rome, Luigi Desanctis, parish priest of St. Maria Maddalena; had abandoned as fair prospects as erudition, character, and favour could well give to an eccle siastic. He had quietly withstood . flattering and influential efforts to bring him back. First he had sheltered under the British flag ; but, finding that the flag of Savoy really shed upon Italian soil the all but inconceivable right of free dom to worship God, he had taken refuge under it. He was now devoting his clear, keen, learned pen to teaching Italy the religion of Christ as he found it in the New Testament. Even in writing for Italians he found it needful to say that it was only by living in Rome, and by knowing Pope, Cardinals, and Curia, that they could come to a clear understanding of the religion of the city. The great cause of this difficulty he found in the three separate circles of doctrine in which that rehgion was wont to be taught, which he called (1) the official, (2) the theological, (3) the real.1 The official doc trine was that for use with heretics, the doctrine presented by Bossuet and Wiseman ; the theological doctrine was for use with men of culture ; the real doctrine was for practical use among the people. The eloquent Barnabite, Gavazzi was now thundering against the Papacy. Nay, even the threshold of the Inquisition had been crossed by the force of Protestant unity. A priest, avowing heresy, who once 1 Roma Pap ale, p. 7. 30 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE had held good preferment, had been seized after the French took the city. At the urgent instance of the Evangelical Alliance, General Baraguay d'Hilliers put on such hard pressure that even in sacred Rome a renegade priest walked out of the palace of the Holy Office a ransomed man. The confidence that the Virgin would reward her new exaltation by corresponding exaltation of him who had pro cured it, was often expressed in language picturesque and ardent. But scarcely had the incense of the fresh offering cleared away when premonitory symptoms appeared of the storm rising again. Meantime, many Catholics became anxious when they found the Pope's favourite organ treating even such writers as Bellarmine, Suarez, and St. Thomas Aquinas, as too much inclined to Liberalism. Liverani, in referring to articles of this kind, says that Bellarmine had been " the author of the Night of St. Bartholomew," and he thinks that Italian Catholics in the nineteenth century might be allowed to be Liberals up to the standard of Bellarmine and Suarez. In 1855, Piedmont, sending a force to the Crimea, took her place beside France and England. The next year, at the Congress of Paris, Cavour lifted up his voice among the repre sentatives of Europe, and protested against foreign occupation in Italy. Mexico abolished the external tribunal of the Church, the ecclesiastical court ; abolished tithes, offered protection to all of either sex who might choose to forsake their convents, and declared its resolution not to submit its acts to the supreme authority of the Apostolic See. Other nations of South America met the aggressive ecclesiastical movement by asserting the supremacy of civil law, even in matters directly ecclesiastical.1 Three years later, the same hand which upheld the Pope in Rome took Lombardy from Austria, and gave it to Piedmont, in exchange for Savoy and Nice. Tuscany, Parma, and Modena banished their dukes ; the Romagna cast off the Papal yoke ; and all these, 1 Allocution of Dec. 15, 1856. Receuil, p. 382. THE GREAT CURSE UPON ITALY 31 uniting themselves to Piedmont, formed the kingdom of Italy. These1 events were met, on the part of the Vatican, by more stringent denunciations of modern liberties. In the Civiltd these were inveighed against under the name of the principles of 1789. Liverani says (p. 160) that the Civiltd, in a Cate chism of Liberty, hardly left a man the use of air and water. The article so alluded to gives what the writer of it calls a Litany, which ought to be repeated with the refrain, Good Lord, deliver us.1 " Liberty of conscience is a perverse opinion diffused by fraudulent endeavours of infidels. " It is a corrupt fountain, a folly, a poisonous error. " It is an injury to the Church and the State, vaunted with shameless impudence as becoming to religion. " It is the liberty of error and the death of the soul. "It is the abyss, the smoke whereof darkens the sun, and the locusts out of which lay waste the earth. " The liberty of the press is an evil liberty, never sufficiently execrated or abhorred. " It is an extravagance of doctrines, and a portentous mon strosity of errors, at which we are horrified." It would be incorrect to suppose that these principles ex clude all possibility of toleration in fact, though not by right. Toleration may be allowed, but never on principle ; never but as the means of avoiding a greater evil. If more harm to the cause of religion would result, in any given country, from intolerance, than from toleration, the latter becomes lawful to the prince of the country. Otherwise it cannot be so. Even this qualified admission of a mere de facto toleration of heretics was not left uncontested. Priests of the Appolonare in Rome about this time, publicly maintained the thesis that " it will never be possible to imagine reasons which should induce a Catholic prince to grant liberty of worship to heretics." They maintained other theses, to the effect that unlimited freedom of worship, and civil rights, granted to heretics, laid the prince open to suspicion of heresy, apostasy, or atheism.2 1 Civiltd, Serie IV. vol. iv. p. 430. 2 Liverani, p. 163. 32 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE This doctrine, cries Liverani, would require the Catholic king of Saxony, with two millions of Protestant subjects, and fifty thousand Catholics, to exterminate the former by means of the latter. It is, he says, putting this alternative— the creed or the stake. Yet this debate was held in presence of the Pope's vicar, Cardinal Patrizi, and was noticed with com mendation by the Civitta. Montalembert proposed that the voting in the Romagna on the question of annexation to Italy should take place under the eye of French troops. Liverani, a native of the Romagna, prelate as he was, replied, " If the French army left, without being replaced by a strong force to guard the lives of the clergy, at the end of a week all the priests and friars would be exterminated, so wild and savage is the pubhc indignation against the government of these last years" (p. 46). On March 26, i860, in the famous and terrible Letters Apostolic Cum Catholica, all the actors and abettors of the territorial changes were placed under the greater excom munication. The Pope 1 expressly decreed that no hand but his own, or that of his successors, should have the power of releasing any one of the countless offenders from the ban, except in the article of death. He proceeds on what seems the fair principle that the dominion of the Pontiff, though in its own nature temporal, takes on a spiritual character because of its spiritual design, as giving to the Head of the whole Church a position independent of any one nation. There fore, robbing him of it becomes a spiritual offence. If he is the representative of God upon earth, it is hard to see how rebellion against him can fail of being a spiritual offence. If he is not the representative of God upon earth, he has altogether mis conceived his own position, and, like any other ruler, may be judged by his merits, not by his pretensions. Before the publication of the Pope's speeches we were exposed to manifold interpretations of the spiritual import of this anathema. It was even possible that we might find 1 Receuil, p. 400. A FREE CHURCH IN A FREE STATE 33 letters in the Times assuring us that the Church never curses. But on June 23, 1871, Pius IX uttered language which put his view of the spiritual import of his own action beyond cavil. He had the words afterwards reprinted, with the ex planation that the allusion to Peter referred to the death of Ananias and Sapphira. " True," said the Pontiff, " I can not, like St. Peter, hurl certain thunders which turn bodies to ashes ; nevertheless, I can hurl thunders which turn souls to ashes. And I have done it by excommunicating all those who perpetrated the sacrilegious spoliation, or had a hand in it." 1 But if to the spiritual eye of Pio Nono his curse had strewn Italy with the ashes of millions of blasted souls, his Bulls were, in a temporal point of view, as powerless as his dogmas. In the autumn of i860, the Pontiff saw Umbria and the Marches wrested from him by the new kingdom, to which also the whole of the Neapolitan territory was added by Garibaldi. After this, Europe grew impatient of the French occupation of Italy, and that last stay of his temporal power became painfully insecure. The Parliament in Turin proclaimed that Rome was the capital of Italy ; and now we have to note the birth of one of those phrases which, becoming watchwards, grow into appreciable forces in history. Cavour, in a speech, alluding to Montalembert, said great authorities had shown that liberty might turn to the profit even of the Church. Montalembert addressed to him a reply, in October, i860, in which he made use of the words, "A free Church in a free State." Five months later, when the Turin Parliament set up the claim to Rome, Cavour used the same phrase. Montalembert, with literary jealousy, pubhcly claimed it : " You have done me the unexpected honour of using the formula I employed in writing to you a few months ago." And, doubly to secure his patent right, as late as August, 1863, in a Catholic Congress at Malines, he declared that it was by the example of Belgium that he had been taught a formula that had now become 1 Discorsi, vol. i. p. 15S. VOL. 1. 3 34 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE famous, " which has been stolen from us by a great offender." He printed his address under the title, " A Free Church in a Free State." * The French father of the phrase lived to write what showed that he had employed it without having defined its terms in his own mind. Had its Italian foster-father, who repeated it in death, lived to govern with it, he would have learned, in the school of action, to select some one of the many interpretations which it invites, or else to discard it as a formula, applicable, indeed, to a Church proper, and a State proper, but incapable of application to a mixed institution hke Romanism, which, however much of a Church, is still more of a State. The loss of Rome, to which political symptoms now pointed as impending, was a calamity to be warded off by all the weapons of the Papacy, sacred and profane. A great assembly of prelates was projected, to surpass in splendour even that of 1854. It was to be equally well guarded against any parha mentary character. In June, 1862, three hundred bishops from all parts of the world were actually collected around their chief. The ceremonies during this assembly displayed a gorgeous pomp, which even Rome, accustomed since the' days of the Emperors to government by spectacle, was fain to recognize as an effort, and a success in its kind, worthy of the historical stake in dispute. The ostensible object was the canonization of certain Japanese martyrs ; but the real anxiety of the moment was so absorbing that the new constellation in the heavens seemed to rise only to rule and decide questions pending as to boundary lines on the earth. In these turbulent and pitiless times, said the Pope, when the Church is pierced with so many wounds ; when her rights, liberties, and doctrines are so miserably violated, especially in Italy, " we urgently desire to have new patrons in the presence of God," by whose prevailing prayers the Church, buffeted with such a horrible tempest, as well as civil society, may 1 See the whole narrative in Unitd Cattolica, March 17, 1870. Also Mrs. Oliphant's Life of Montalembert. A UNIVERSAL MONARCHY 35 obtain the much-longed-for repose.1 The aid of the new patrons was that to which faith and hope pathetically turned, in the concluding prayer put up on Whit-Sunday by the Pontiff : " Regard Thy Church, now afflicted with such calami ties : take not away Thy mercy from us ; but for the sake of these Thy saints, and through their merits, cause Thy Church," etc., etc.2 Besides the influence to be exerted by the exalted Japanese on behalf of the temporal sovereignty, valuable results might attend a solemn declaration from the episcopate of the whole world. This would at all events silence priests who had dared to think amiss, and would affect not only the calculations of statesmen, but also the complexion of public opinion. The faith of Romanists in a display is, to all who have been trained not to take an impression for a reason, absolutely incompre hensible. Lamartine, in relating the perplexities of Mirabeau when the gusts of the Revolution had begun to appal even him, exactly pictures what is the outcome of their sensuous training. " He would save the monarchy by a royal pro clamation and a ceremony to make the king popular." A declaration was made by the assembled bishops with all possible gravity and force. The language chosen by Pope and prelates was the strongest to be found. They were not content with pledging themselves to the temporal dominion as a good, useful, helpful, or urgently desirable thing. Staking the future for the present, as well as the spiritual for the temporal, they declared that it was " necessary " in order to the exercise of the full pontifical authority over the whole Church. If this is so, there has been no proper exercise of authority over the whole Church since 1870, nor can there be any till the Pope again finds some few hundred thousand of Italians calling him king. If it is not so, the collective 1 Schrader, Pius IX, als Papst und als Konig, p. 21 . Idcirco summo pere optamus novos apud Deum habere patronbs, qui in tanto rerum discrimine validissimis suis precibus impetrent ut, tam horribili dis- cussa malorum procella optatissimam Catholica Ecclesia et Civilis Societas assequatur pacem, 2 Papst und Kon.g. p. 23. 36 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE hierarchy, and the Pope with them, erred in setting forth a doctrine, touching the Head of the Church, for the guidance of all mankind. The Pope himself not only said that the temporal power was necessary, but that it had been given by a matchless counsel of Providence. The reason he gives for its necessity is the stock one, that the Pope may not be a dependent of any prince, as if he had not been the helpless dependent of Napoleon III. The bishops, forgetting both this dependence and the sanguinary measures by which the tem poral power was upheld, actually used such words as " noble, tranquil, and genial liberty." 1 Besides their testimony to the necessity of the temporal power, the bishops put on record words well adapted to pre pare the way for the dogma of Papal infallibility — words often afterwards recalled to those of them who opposed that dogma in 1870. " Thou art to us the teacher of sound doctrine, thou the centre of unity, thou the quenchless hght of the nations, set up by divine wisdom. Thou art the rock, and the foundation of the Church herself, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail. When thou speakest, we hear Peter ; when thou dost decree, we yield obedience to Christ." 2 But the new saints of 1862 did not turn the tide any more than the " Immaculate " of 1854 had done. Italy held together, though Cavour was gone. The effort of the two Catholic emperors to secure Mexico for the Church, by placing a monarch of approved principles on the throne, ended in a tragic failure. The grief felt everywhere at the fate of Maxi milian of Hapsburg was intensified for Pius IX, because, as it is expressed by Professor Massi, the promises made to the Pope 1 Civiltd Cattolica, Serie V, vol. ii. p. 721. Their words are : " In nobili, tranquiUa, et alma libertate catholicam fidem tueri," etc. Monsignor Nardi proudly referred Mamiani, in the summer of 1869, to the folio volumes in which 835 bishops had inscribed their adhesion to the necessity of the temporal power. (Stimmen, Neue Folge, v. P- I53-) 2 Civiltd, Serie V. vol. ii. pp. 719, 723. " Tu populis lumen inde- ficiens. . . . Tu Petra es, et ipsius ecclesiae fundamentum . . . Te loquente, Petrum audimus, Te decernente, Christo obtemperamus." The text even of the Vulgate is changed in the words, Tu Petra es. CHAOS. 37 by Maximilian, when he came to Rome before taking the reins of empire, "were to remain void."1 Finally, in 1864, the Convention of September brought home to the Pope the fact that, unless the Virgin should work a miracle for him, he was to be abandoned by the foreign auxiliaries whose presence he hated, but the terror of whom was the only shade in which he could rest. Perhaps he remembered how soon after the foreign Emperor had held the Pope's bridle, the Italian Lambert called him " My Lord," as he would have done to any other baron, and drove him to hard straits. It was in this position of affairs that the seers of the Vatican beheld all human institutions as if reduced by a cataclysm to a dark and roaring chaos. And on their principles chaos it was. Not only had kings and lawgivers withdrawn themselves from under the authority of the supreme tribunal, not only had civil courts been withdrawn from under the authority of the external tribunal, but almost all governments had ceased to enforce by law the attendance of their subjects on the in ternal tribunal of the Church which they thus degraded to the level of a voluntary confessional. In each of the three circles of all-embracing authority, therefore, order was now disrupted, and chaos had broken in. The seer could see but one remedy. Society must be reconstructed, and that upon the basis of one world-wide monarchy. It is but slowly that minds accustomed to judge by ordinary standards learn to attach a precise meaning to such expressions as the above, in the language of the Vatican. Even after having learned how definite is the meaning, we do not soon begin to associate ideas of deliberate plan and serious expect ation, with what would seem to be only dreams of the cloister. We therefore give a few clear sentences from // Genio Cattolico, a publication praised by the authoritative Unitd Cattolica.2 It describes the true ideal of the Papacy as being " an immense variety of languages, traditions, legislations, letters, com- 1 Life of Pius IX. Frond, vol. i. p. 102. 2 II Genio Cattolico Periodico Religioso — Scientifico, Litterario, Politico di Reggio Nell' Emilia, 1873. 38 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE merce, institutions, and alliances, under the moral and pacific empire of a single Father, who, with the sceptre of the word, upholds the equilibrium of the world. The Papacy is not, as German jurists call it, a State within the State, but is a cos mopolitan authority, the moderator of all States, the supreme and universal standard of law and justice. It is a world-wide monarchy, from which all other monarchies that would call themselves Christian derive life, order, and equilibrium." Coupling this distinct conception of the appointed place of the Papacy in the human commonwealth with the equally distinct conviction that modern society is in ruins, the writer proceeds : " What is the remedy ? The recognition of a common father, who shall teach subjects to obey as sons, and sovereigns to rule as fathers ; a supreme judge, to declare and give sanctions to the rights of the one and the other. Without this, how can the want of balance in the conflicting forces be redressed ? " With views thus radical and all-comprehending did the Court of Pius IX proceed to build up, after a very ancient ideal, an empire over all peoples, nations, and languages, the test of which should be acceptance of the religious symbol set up by the autocrat. In the projected reconstruction the ultimate end, the restoration of facts, would always include these cardinal points. Every man and every woman in Christendom, and, by a due extension of " the kingdom of God," every man and every woman living, must be bound by law to appear, at the least annually, in the internal tribunal of the Church, the confessional. In order to this, every civil magistrate must be set in obvious and in practical subordin ation to the ecclesiastical magistrate or bishop, by the sub jection of the civil court to the external tribunal of the Church, the" ecclesiastical court. In order to this, every king or lawgiver must be set also in obvious and in practical sub ordination to the supreme tribunal of the church, the Pope, by a restored state of international law, giving to the Pontiff, or, to speak accurately, recognizing in the Pontiff what God had given to him, full power to deliver sentence as supreme THE "INTERNAL TRIBUNAL" 39 judge upon the rights of all kings, and upon the merits of every law. We for the sake of clearness, say three tribunals, though technically they are only two, the Pope being in both supreme. Whether the subject enters by the foro externo or by the foro interno, by the ecclesiastical court or by the confessional, both in the ultimate instance conduct him to the one bar, that of the Judge of judges. The supreme tribunal is he, in all causes not purely material, in all causes whereinto enters any moral or religious consideration. Protestants would seem generally to imagine that the ecclesiastical court is a higher tribunal than the confessional. Not so. When a conflict arises between the sentence of the external tribunal and that of the internal, the suitor at the bar of God's kingdom is bound by the judgment of the internal tribunal ! 1 In Carleton's Traits and Stories of the Irish Peasantry, where the only symbol of any tribunal is a rickety chair standing on an earthen floor full of holes, the priest of God has no sooner put on robe and stole than " the tribunal " is as truly con stituted as when in the palace of Charles V sat Domenico Soto with the imperial penitent kneeling before him, and said, " So far you have confessed the sins of Charles, now 1 This is briefly and well put in the Acta Sanctm Sedis (V. 146), where an article of the Times on the bull of convocation of the Vatican Council is belaboured through twelve pages of double-column Latin. That journal had the audacity to set up conscience against Pope, and to name Luther. " What do you understand by conscience ? for it is solemnly held by Catholics that we may not and cannot act contrary to con science. Indeed, we confess that, in point of fact, we may be bound to act even against the sentence pronounced by an ecclesiastical authority, seeing that the external tribunal, as we say, does not always concur with the internal tribunal, and whenever the internal tribunal is in opposition to the external tribunal, we are bound to follow the internal. On this point consult our Catholic authors when they treat of moral theology. Immo fatemur, posse in re facti contingere, ut agere teneamur contra ipsam latam auctoritatis ecclesiasticae senten- tiam ; quandoquidem forum externum, ut loqui solemus, non semper cohseret cum foro interno : et quoties forum internum in oppositione sit cum foro externo, primum sequi tenemur. De qua re consulendi sunt auctores nostri Catholici de morali theologia agentes." 40 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE confess those of the Emperor." In that tribunal has the peasant bride to learn, and has the Queen to learn, that not the husband is the head of the woman, but the priest of God. In that tribunal has the shoeless Connaught child and has the imperial prince to learn that not the parents are the head of the children, but the priest of God. In that tribunal has the debtor and has the creditor, the executor and the legatee to learn that not the law of the civil bench obliges, but the law pronounced by the priest of God. In that tribunal have all these to learn that not even the law which falls from the ecclesiastical judge in the external tribunal is to be taken, but that which in the internal tribunal, in holy secrecy, be tween the conscience alone and the judge alone, falls with full force of binding and of loosing from the lips of the priest of God. So in the other, the external tribunal, has every citizen to learn, and every public servant, that not the magis trate* is the head of the town, and not the chief magistrate is the head of the city, but that the bishop is head of both one and the other, for he is the head of the priests of God. Finally, at the supreme bar have the princes, the governors and cap tains, the judges, the treasurers, the counsellors, the sheriffs, and all the rulers of the provinces, to learn that not the president, not the grand duke, not the king, not the emperor, is the head of the nation, but the thrice-crowned King of kings, the Great High Priest of God. This kingdom, it is held, with some stretching of the facts, did in the Ages of Faith prevail, and it is to be restored. The restoration of facts could not be effected without a foregoing restoration of the idea of Hildebrand. Constantine had founded a State Church. Leo III, with Charlemagne, had founded what Mr. Bryce accurately describes as a Catholic State, with the Pope as spiritual and the Emperor as temporal head. Cardinal Manning points out that in this Mr. Bryce makes the holy Roman Empire a two-headed monster.1 Nevertheless Mr. Bryce gives the true human history, though doubtless Cardinal Manning, following Boniface VIII, gives 1 Vatican Decrees, p. 6y. SUPREMACY OF SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY 41 the correct Papal doctrine. According to that doctrine, the dualism of a double-headed State amounted to a sort of Manicheism. History, which is guilty of tainting many with one heresy or another, must bear the fault of Mr. Bryce's Manicheism. But Hildebrand would abolish all dualism. The whole world must have one head. Constantine's idea of a State Church had its merit of unity, but it was unity by perversion of rights. The true idea was that of a Church State, embracing the whole world, and placing all mankind as one fold under one shepherd. This true idea was to be restored. We shall in its place, be taught how we err in calling power over temporal affairs temporal power. More accurately, does Cardinal Manning speak of "the supreme judicial power of the Church in temporal things." 1 He speaks of " the in direct spiritual power of the Church over the temporal State," 2 thus showing the error of the notion that spiritual power means only power over spiritual affairs. He speaks of " the Christian jurisprudence in which the Roman Pontiff was recognized as the Supreme Judge of Princes and People, with a twofold coercion, spiritual by his own authority, and temporal by the secular arm." 3 The turn of phraseology in the last sentence is probably not undesigned. Had it been employed by a Protestant, Ultra montanes, if writing in Italy, would have cried out, Ignorance and inaccuracy ! Does the Cardinal mean that the authority whereby the Pope through the secular arm applies temporal coercion is not his own authority ? No, assuredly. Yet he leaves us in a position to slip into some such idea. In such coercion as that of which he speaks it is not that the secular power acts of its own authority, but that it acts with its own arm, but with the Pope's authority. The interesting doctrine of the Brahman as sprung from the Creator's head, and the King-caste as sprung from his arm, reappears in the Papal system, in which the priest anointed on the head and the prince anointed on the arm symbolize respectively the authority 1 Ibid. p. 82. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid. 84. 42 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE that gives law and the force that carries it out.1 But Car dinal Manning's definition of Christian jurisprudence as that wherein the Pope is recognized as supreme Judge of Prince and People is not only strict, but it also explains a whole set of terms — Christian government, Christian law, Christian order, Christian civilization, and so forth. It was obvious that to effect in Europe such a restoration as these claims implied, a lengthened preparation of ideas must go before the restoration of facts ; and that restoration of ideas it was which we now see undertaken. 1 " Since Jesus of Nazareth, . . . the anointing of princes is changed from the head to the arm ; but the sacramental anointing is stiU main tained upon the head of the bishop, because he, in his episcopal office, represents the person of the Head. There is, however, a distinction between the anointing of the bishop and of the prince, because the head of the bishop is anointed with the ointment, but the arm of the prince is rubbed with oil, that it may be shown what a difference exists between the authority of the bishop and the power of the prince." — Phillips, n. 621 — -quoting Bennetti's Priv. S. Petri Vindicics. " Now, here are two things to be noted. First, that the emperor holds an office of human creation — the Pontiff an office of divine creation. Secondly, that the office of divine creation is for a higher end than the office which is of human origin." — -Cardinal Manning, " Vatican Decrees," p. 68. CHAPTER V The Syllabus of Errors, December 8, 1864 — Character of the Propo sitions condemned — Disabilities of the State — Powers of the Church TO ordinary readers the Syllabus would rather appear to be a destructive instrument than a constructive one. Its authorized expounders, however, with remarkable unan imity, treat it as the foundation for the enduring fabric of reconstructed society. Its form accounts for the first impres sion on the part of the outside world. It is a series of con demned propositions, drawn from official and authoritative utterances of Pius IX — a syllabus or collection of errors, condemned in judgments pronounced by him as supreme judge of Christendom. These, taken collectively, form a politico-ecclesiastical system. The eighty propositions range over most subjects. As all stand under the head of condemned errors, each proposition is, logically, to be read with the prefix, " We reprove and condemn the following proposition." Some of these sentences express the beliefs of infidels, and some those of all Christians but Romanists ; some the crudest notions of socialists, and some the fundamental principles of free States, or the maxims of all thriving communities ; some the crotchets of obscure theorists in philosophy and ethics, and some the postulates of all free science. These heterogeneous beliefs and disbeliefs are strung together and delivered over, before the universe, to eternal anathema. Passing from abstract to concrete, embodiments of evil are condemned, whether the body is a Church, a Bible Society, a Freemasons' lodge, a pack of communists, or even such clan- 44 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE destine gangs as were known in Christendom only to the territory of the Pope and his favourite Italian princes. Perhaps the eventual importance of this manifesto was, at the time, exaggerated at the Vatican, and is exaggerated even yet. " In this century," says the Genio Cattolico, already quoted, " rises up the sublime and gigantic figure of Pius IX, another Hfldebrand. He is charged by divine Providence with the erection in our day of a new edifice upon the debris of the religious and political revolution, as in former times Gregory VII was commissioned to reconstruct a similar edifice upon the scattered remains of tyranny. Gregory had his Dicta ; Pius IX has his Syllabus." The Civiltd Cattolica has never ceased to glorify the Syllabus. A periodical, expressly devoted to expounding and commending it to the Germans, and making it the basis of a new social condition in that country, was commenced at a Jesuit monas tery near Bonn, under the title of Stimmen aus Maria Laach. Catholic journals spoke of the universal scope and pregnant consequences of the Syllabus in te.rms at which men of the world were more inclined to smile than to take warning. The views taken of the document by learned Catholics not of the Ultramontane school are briefly put by Michelis : " Constitu tional freedom, equality before the law, liberty of the Press, all the foundations of modern civilization, were all at once pronounced to be hostile to the Catholic faith."1 Hints were not wanting that it might introduce a conflict which would rage through centuries, and perhaps leave nothing standing but the Church. Still, for the time, politicians were rather annoyed than alarmed, and perhaps no Protestant statesman thought the matter serious enough to feel even annoyance. Protestant statesmen were still somewhat in the state of mind expressed by Ranke : " What is there that can now make the history of the Papacy interesting and important to us ? Not its peculiar relation to us, which can no longer affect us in any material point ; nor the anxiety or dread which it can inspire. 1 Kurze Geschichte, p. io. It will be seen that here, as in the Civiltd, the meaning of civilization is concrete, the civtt system. A TRANSFORMED PAPACY 45 The times in which we had anything to fear are over ; we are conscious of our perfect security. The papacy can inspire us with no other interest than what arises from its historical development and its former influence." This prognostic, the shortsightedness of which the Germans have been painfully taught, obviously sprang out of a confusion of ideas, expressed immediately afterwards, where Ranke identifies changing pro fessions and claims diplomatically presented with fixed maxims, with objects and claims founded on cherished dogma, and felt to be inalienable. As to the Papacy, Ranke says, " Complete metamorphoses have taken place in its maxims, objects, and claims." l In contrast with the indifference founded on this supposed change was the view of the Civiltd in surveying the events of 1864. The year had been, according to it, one marked by that silent preparation of ideas which brings around great events. To the unobserving this preparation was unseen ; but the process was going on and the issue certain. Casting a glance around the world, the Civiltd showed that everywhere what it calls the revolution, what we call representative govern ment, was becoming ruinous, and the old Catholic ideal of government regaining its place in the mind of the thoughtful. In Belgium, it had come to that pass that an important paper declared that the tyranny of a majority was worse than that of an autocrat. By a manifest Providence, that immense Babylon the United States, founded on the principles of the revolution, was broken up and undone. The new Mexican empire had all the more promise of stability, as it would retain, at least in part, Catholic principles. This historical article proceeded to say that the greatest merit of the past year lay — In the highly important pontifical documents with which it had 1 History of Popes, Engl. tran. 2nd ed., p. 19. The learned author, forty years after he wrote the above, in publishing his sixth edition, referring to these words, says that they expressed the view of the epoch, " but I cannot conceal from myself that a new epoch of the Papacy has commenced." 46 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE been so solemnly closed. The Encyclical of his Holiness Pius IX of December 8, and the Syllabus accompanying it, speak clearly enough of themselves, and need not our comments. Those exceed ingly grave utterances of pontifical wisdom and fortitude are already perused in every tongue spoken by Catholics, that is, by the civilized world. Nor do Catholics alone read them ; even Liberals do so too. And already we begin to hear a distant echo of the fear and wrath felt by the Liberals. They, who themselves change moment by moment, cannot understand that the Church should never change, in her principles or in her doctrine. They, who would conciliate everything — and, when they can do no more, conciliate fact with law — by the stupid word fait accompli, cannot be at peace, because the Church will not be reconciled to impiety and absurdity. They do not believe with divine faith in the potency of the pontifical word ; but they do believe by an instinct of terror, as the devils also believe and tremble. Hence the stream of filth now vainly flowing against those documents from the Italian and foreign journals. The Liberals tremble at this warning, and cannot restrain their vexation, because so many hypocritical efforts to mask their Liberalism under Catholicism are at last brought to nought. They are now compelled to lay aside the mask more and more. No longer can they deceive the simple. They must now declare themselves open enemies of the Church and of her definitions.1 Though the Syllabus is not even in profession a proclamation of the glory of Christ, or of the Christian verities, or of the mission of the Church to turn sinners from their sins to God, but is formally a charter of ecclesiastical dominion over civil society, the first fourteen of its eighty propositions are named as if drawn from the domain of philosophy and theology. They, however, lay the doctrinal basis for the political claims that follow. The fifth proposition illustrates the difficulty of judging of the practice of the Church of Rome by her theory, or vice versa. She condemns the following : " That divine revelation is im perfect, and therefore subject to a continuous and indefinite progress, which corresponds to the progress of human reason." Persons not of her own communion would say that, except for the last clause, this might express the ground on which the 1 Civiltd, Serie VI., vol. i. p. 172, 173. LIBERTY AND THE SYLLABUS 47 fabric of Roman doctrine, properly so called, is built. Beheving too much almost always springs from believing too little. He who believes enough about one God does not want assistant divinities. He who believes enough about one Mediator does not want to multiply the number. He who believes enough about one revelation does not want new revelations. Both the Councils of Trent and of the Vatican keep up the theory of only developing revelation. Practically their proceedings are pervaded with this principle, " That divine revelation is subject to continuous and indefinite progress." The popular effect of this is that new ("Wim-revelations are of frequent occurrence.1 It is, however, at the fifteenth proposition that the framers of the Syllabus emerge into their natural element. In it the opinion condemned is that every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which he may esteem true, following the light of reason. This, with the few other propositions under the head of Indifferentism and Latitudinarianism, prepare the way for a section, in which communism, clandestine societies, and Bible societies are bound into one bundle. This again introduces the two great sections, that on the Church, and that on the State. These together comprise thirty-seven proposi tions. A section on ethics and one on marriage follow. Mar riage is treated not at all in respect to the morals of wedded life, or to the sanctities of the connubial and parental relation, but in respect to those questions which affect ecclesiastical authority and its relation to the civil. The concluding sections treat of the temporal sovereignty, and of modern Liberalism. Who would look for Liberalism under the improbable heading of Naturalism ? yet both the Civiltd and the Stimmen, proceeding on lines laid down by Bishop Pie of Poictiers, elaborately showed how the fundamental heresy of all those condemned was Naturalism, because, viewed in the light of the 1 Friedrich, in his Mechanismus der Vatikanischen Religion, p. 12, says that these revelations no longer need to come from God, but may come from other persons, especially from Mary. 48 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Encyclical, all those errors converged in the " denial of the supernatural character of the Church." Under the section treating of the Church, the first proposition affirms the important principle as to the Church being a perfect society. Yet this is put into a sentence containing explicitly or implicitly a number of propositions, some negative, some affirmative, and nearly all of great ambiguity. The error condemned is, " The Church is not a true and perfect society completely free, nor is she invested with rights proper to herself and permanent, conferred by her divine Founder ; but it belongs to the civil power to define the rights of the Church, and the limits within which those rights are to be exercised " (prop. 19). This, be it remembered, is the proposition con demned. Keeping in view the ambiguity of the several predicates, the following points are to be noted — 1. The Church is a perfect society. 2. The Church is completely free. 3. The Church has the direct authority of Christ for her rights. 4. The State cannot define the rights of the Church. 5. The State cannot even limit the exercise of those rights. The broad denial of the right of the State to define or limit the rights of the Church, without distinction, is meant to cover, and, to Vaticanists, does cover, the right of the Church to define the limits of her own authority as to its domain and as to its exercise, and consequently the right to define the limits of the authority of the State, both as to its sphere and its exercise. Yet, what is, at first sight, simpler to superficial readers than denying the right of the State to define the rights of a Church ? It is a right of a Church to believe, to pray, to worship, and to preach. Is the State to define such rights ? It is a right claimed by one Church to pray any day to " new patrons," whom, as Moses said, " Thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers " ; yet is the State to assume the function of defining such rights ? But one Church also claims the right of employ ing mercenaries and foreign auxiliaries to force a few millions of men of a fine race, in a fine country, to submit to her chief pastor as their king. She also claims the right to set her priests, JUDGMENTS OF THE CHURCH 49 in any country, before the princes of the nation ; and the right, not merely to ask for an alteration of the law of the land, but to declare it void — the right even to tell subjects when and where they may lawfully break law.1 Now, both classes of claims are covered by the one word " rights," and the State is confidently warned off from a fort, or from the pamphlet of a seditious bishop, as if that ground was lawful Church ground ; indeed, as if it was holy, like the shrines of faith and worship sanctified by our Lord and His apostles. Father Bucceroni may be taken as fairly conveying the whole effect of the Syllabus on the relations of the State to the Church, when he says that " Catholic civil society is bound to yield to the Church, even in temporal affairs, if the advance ment of a spiritual end calls for it " ; and " religion should be so positively protected that the judgments of the Church should never be obstructed." In resenting the prohibition of Napoleon III to promulgate the Syllabus in France, the Civiltd spoke thus of the error which misled politicians — It proceeds from the behef that it is the civil authority which permits the Church to exercise within its territory her jurisdiction over the faithful. Nothing is more false. The faithful, wherever found, are subject to the Church by the will of Christ, and not by the will of the State. They must necessarily be governed by two authorities, by the civil and the ecclesiastical, each freely acting within its proper circle ; yet the first in subordination to the second, as the interests of the body are subordinate to those of the soul. The Christian people, to whatever nation they belong, be they Italians, Germans, or French, if subjects of the Emperor as to things temporal, are also subjects of the Pope as to things spiritual, and more of the Pope than of the Emperor. Laughing at M. Langlais, who in the French Courts argued 1 " It is not allowable either that the temporal authorities should make a law, in reference to an ecclesiastical subject, on which the Canons have not determined anything ; or, that through their law they should change Canons that are in existence. Every law of the kind opposed to ecclesiastical rules, or enacted in addition to them, if not desired by the Church, or expressly recognized by her, is hence in itself invalid." — Phillips, ii. 563. VOL. I. 4 50 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE that the Pope in treating of the very foundations of political institutions had gone beyond his proper sphere, that of faith and morals, the Civiltd said — According to our weak way of thinking, the legitimate argument would have run thus : The Pope has a right to give a decision only within the moral order : the Pope has given a decision as to such and such propositions ; therefore those propositions belong to the moral order.1 In reading the following abstract it is to be remembered that we aim not at giving a complete but a summary view of the effect of the Syllabus on the relations of Church and State, and that we do not necessarily disapprove of each separate claim specified. Of course neither the disabilities of the State nor the powers of the Church here indicated are embodied in the existing institutions of any country. They are only the disabilities on the one part, and the powers on the other, which would be embodied in the institutions of every country did the tribunal of the Pope acquire the supremacy which it claims. We need hardly remind careful readers that denying a proposi tion does not necessarily mean asserting its contrary. But it does at least imply asserting its contradictory. Schrader indeed says that it is the contradictory of the condemned proposition that is to be maintained. But his own counter- propositions do not adhere to that rule. What they assert is sometimes the contrary of the condemned proposition. To explain these technical terms — One asserts that all Englishmen are shop keepers. You deny it. That denial does not pledge you to assert that no Englishman is a shopkeeper ; which proposi tion is the contrary of the other. But it does pledge you at least to assert that some Englishmen are not shopkeepers ; which proposition is the contradictory. Two contraries may be both false ; of two contradictories one must be false and the other true. 1 VI. i. 652-3. DISABILITIES OF THE STATE 51 SUMMARY OF POINTS ASSUMED IN THE SYLLABUS AS TO THE DISABILITIES OF THE STATE, AND THE RIGHTS AND POWERS OF THE CHURCH Disabilities of the State (N.B. — The numbers attached to the respective propositions indicate the Articles of the Syllabus in which they are contained.) The State has not the right to leave every man free to profess and embrace whatever religion he shaU deem true. (15.) It has not the right to define the rights of the Church, nor to define the limits within which she is to exercise those rights. (19.) It has not the right to enact that the ecclesiastical power shall require the permission of the civil power in order to the exercise of its authority. (20.) It has not the right to treat as an excess of power, or as usurping the rights of princes, anything that the Roman Pontiffs or (Ecu menical Councils have done. (23.) It has not the right to deny to the Church the use of force, or to deny to her the possession of either a direct or an indirect temporal power. (24.) It has not the right to revoke any temporal power found in the possession of bishops as if it had been granted to them by the State. (25.) It has not the right to exclude the Pontiff or clergy from all dominion over temporal affairs. (27.) It has not the right to prevent bishops from publishing the Letters Apostolic of the Pope, without its sanction. (28.) It has not the right of treating the immunity of the Church and of ecclesiastical persons as if it were a privilege arising out of civil law. (30.) It has not the right, without consent of the Pope, of abolishing ecclesiastical courts for temporal causes, whether civil or criminal, to which the clergy are parties. (31.) It has not the right of abolishing the personal immunity of the clergy and students for the priesthood from military service.1 (32.) It has not the right to adopt the conclusions of a National Church Council, unless confirmed by the Pope. (36.) It has not the right of establishing a National Church separate from the Pope. (37.) 1 The word is generally translated " clergy " in English. But it is not cleri but clerici, which includes divinity students, and is commonly translated in Italian by chierici. In Italy the class which would have been exempted under cover of the student's right would have been very numerous. 52 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE It has not the right of asserting itself to be the fountain of all rights; or of asserting a jurisdiction not limited by any other jurisdiction, say that of the Pope. (39.) N.B.— The absence of any distinction between legal rights, of which the State alone is the fountain, and natural rights, of which the laws that create legal rights are but the recognition, is characteristic and pervasive. It has not the right even of an indirect or negative power over " religious affairs." (41.) It has not the right of exequatur, nor yet that of allowing an appeal from an ecclesiastical court to a civil one. (41.) It has not the right of asserting the supremacy of its own laws when they come into conflict with ecclesiastical law. (42.) It has not the right of rescinding or annulling concordats or grants of immunity agreed upon by the Pope, without his consent. (43-) „ It has not the right to interfere in "matters pertaimng to religion, morals, or spiritual government. (44.) It has not the right to judge any instruction which may be issued by pastors of the Church for the guidance of consciences. (44.) It has not the right to the entire direction of public schools. (45.) It has not the right of requiring that the plan of studies in clerical seminaries shall be submitted to it. (46.) It has not the right to present bishops, or to depose them, or to found sees. (50, 51.) It has not the right to interfere with the taking of monastic vows by its subjects of either sex, or to fix any limit to the age at which it may be done. (52.) It has not the right to assist subjects who wish to abandon monasteries or convents. (53.) It has not the right to abolish monasteries or convents. (53.) It has not the right of determining questions of jurisdiction as between itself and the ecclesiastical authority. (54.) It has not the right to separate itself from the Church. (55.) It has not the right to provide for the study of philosophy, or moral science, or civil law eluding the ecclesiastical authority (57). N.B. — Moral science includes politics and economy. It has not the right to proclaim or to observe the principle of non-intervention. (62.) It has not the right to declare the marriage contract separable from the sacrament of marriage. (66.) 'tit has not the right to sanction divorce in any case. (67.) It has not the right to prevent the Church from setting up impedi ments which invalidate marriage. It has no right to set up such POWERS OF THE CHURCH 53 impediments itself. It has no right to abolish such impediments already existing. (67.) •- It has not the right to uphold any marriage solemnized otherwise than according to the form prescribed by the Council of Trent, even if solemnized according to a form sanctioned by the civil law. (71.) It has not the right to recognize any marriage between Christians as valid, unless the Sacrament is included. (73.) It has not the right to declare that matrimonial causes, or those arising out of betrothals, belong by their nature to the civil juris diction. (74.)] Rights and Powers of the Church N.B. — In many cases, the propositions under this head show the powers ,.- of the Church directly corresponding to the disabilities of the State expressed under the previous head. 1% She has the right to interfere with the study of philosophy, and it is not her duty to tolerate errors in it, or to leave it to correct itself. (11.) She has the right to require the State not to leave every man free to profess his own religion. (15.) She has the right to be perfectly free. She has the right to define her own rights, and to define the limits within which they are to be exercised. (19.) She has the right to exercise her power without the permission or consent of the State. (20.) She has the right to bind Catholic teachers and authors, even in matters additional to those which may have been decreed as articles of behef binding on all. (22. ) She has the right of requiring it to be beheved by all that no Pope ever exceeded the bounds of his power ; also that no (Ecumenical Council ever did so, and further, that neither the one nor the other ever usurped the rights of princes. (23.) She has the right to employ force. (24.) She has the right to maintain that whatever temporal power is found in the hands of a bishop, is not beyond what is inherent in his office, and has not come from the State, and therefore is not liable to be resumed by it. (25. ) |5. She has the right to claim dominion in temporal things for the clergy and the Pope. (27.) She has the right to make bishops promulge the Pope's decrees without consent of their rulers. (28.) She has the right to require it to be believed of all, that the 54 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE immunity of the Church, and of ecclesiastical persons, did not arise out of civil law. (30.) She has the right to require that temporal causes, whether civil or criminal, to which clergymen are parties, should be tried by ecclesiastical tribunals. (31.) She has the right to alter the conclusions of a National Church Council, and to reject the claim of the Government of the country to have the matter decided in the terms adopted by such National Council. (36.) She has the right to prevent the foundation of any National Church, not subject to the authority of the Roman Pontiff. (37.) She has the right to reject any claim on the part of the State to either a direct and positive or an indirect and negative power in religious affairs, and more especially when the State is ruled by an unbelieving prince. (41.) She has the right to reject the claim of the State to exercise a power of exequatur, or to allow appeals from ecclesiastical to civil tribunals. (41.) She has the right to exclude the civil power from all interference in " matters which appertain to " religion, morals, and spiritual government. Hence she has the right of excluding it from pronounc ing any judgment on instructions which may be issued by any pastor of the Church for the guidance of conscience. (44.) She has the right to deprive the civil authority of the entire government of public schools. (45.) She has the right to refuse to show the plan of study in clerical seminaries to civil authorities. (46.) She has the right to fix the age for taking monastic vows both for men and women, irrespective of the civil authority. (52.) She has the right to uphold the laws of rehgious orders against the civil authority ; the right to deprive the latter of power to aid any who, after having taken vows, should seek to escape from monasteries or nunneries ; and the right to prevent it from taking the houses, churches, or funds of rehgious orders under secular management. (53.) She has the right of holding kings and princes in subjection to her jurisdiction, and of denying that their authority is superior to her own in determining questions of jurisdiction. (54.) She has the right of perpetuating the union of Church and State. (55-) She has the right of subjecting the study of philosophy, moral science, and civil law, to ecclesiastical authority. (56.) She has the right of enjoining a policy of intervention. (62.) QUESTIONS AFFECTING MARRIAGE 55 She has the right to require the sacrament of marriage as essential to every contract of marriage. (62.) She has the right to deprive the civil authority of power to sanction divorce in any case. (67.) She has the right to enact impediments which invalidate marriage, the right to prevent the State from doing so, also the right to prevent it from annulling such impediments when existing. (68.) She has the right to require all to receive the Canons of Trent as of dogmatical authority, namely, those Canons which anathematize such as deny her the power of setting up impediments which in- vali date marriage . (70 . ) She has the right of treating all marriages which are not solemn ized according to the form of the Council of Trent as invalid, even those solemnized according to a form prescribed by the civil law (7I-) She has the right of annulling all marriages among Christians solemnized only by civil contract. (73.) She has the right of judging all matrimonial causes, and those arising out of betrothals, in ecclesiastical courts. (74.) She has the right to require that the Catholic religion shall be the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all others. (77.) She has the right to prevent the State from granting the public exercise of their own worship to persons immigrating into it. (78.) She has the power of requiring the State not to permit free expression of opinion. (79.) The importance of questions affecting marriage and betrothal is threefold. (1) Immense revenues accrue to the Court and bureaucracy of Rome from the system of dispensations for marrying within the degrees forbidden in any one of the three separate scales of consanguinity, affinity, or spiritual affinity, i.e., affinity contracted by sponsorship at baptism or confirma tion. (2) The grant, every five years, of a Quinquennial Faculty to the bishop to issue such dispensations as affect those distant degrees within which dispensations do not pay a tax, or to the poor who cannot pay, holds the bishop in per petual dependence on the Curia. (3) The whole system of im pediments and dispensations subserves the end of extending the control of the priesthood over domestic life through the reluct ance felt in famihes at the time of a marriage, as at that of a death, to cause scandal by a difference with " the clergy." 56 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE PhiUips says (ii. 639) that in modern times the union of Church and State is frequently compared to wedlock — not an inapt figure, but one calling for care lest it be taken in a wrong sense. " That would be the case if in this union the female partner was taken for the Church, and the male partner for the State. If we employ this simile, we must think of the relative positions as just reversed." This seems reasonable. The legal position of a married woman, a feme covert, would appear not ill to correspond with that of a State bound to the husband, who calls himself a mother. CHAPTER VI The Secret Memoranda of the Cardinals, February 1865 THE Cardinals who, in the beginning of December, were commanded to prepare notes on the expediency of holding a Council, did not hurry, but by the beginning of February fifteen such notes were in the hands of the Pope. Their Eminences discussed the subject under four heads : 1. The present condition of the world ; 2. The desirableness or otherwise of resorting to the ultimate remedy of a General Council ; 3. The difficulties in the way of holding one, and the means of overcoming them ; 4. The subjects of which a Council might treat. The most eminent consulters, or, as our historian loves to call them, the purpled (i porporati), showed how the present age was remarkable for progress in invention. This formed its favourable side. But then such progress served only temporal ends. The " Christian government of the world," as it existed in former ages, had given place to a system based on the prin ciple that society, as such, had nothing to do with God. The points in the sad spectacle of this " social apostasy," which most distressed the Cardinals, were as foUows — Education was withdrawn from the supreme vigilance of the Catholic Church, and consequently ran into manifold errors ; the doctrines of naturalism, rationalism, and various forms of pantheism prevailed, from which sprang socialism and com munism. Coming to pohtical affairs, some of the writers mourned over the prevalence of revolutionary principles in general, some over freedom of worship and of the Press in particular, and some over the tyranny of the State, which controUed education and charitable institutions — thus appropriating 67 58 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE to itself aU the social forces. Some, again, lamented the violation of the rights of the Church in regard to laws affecting marriage, to those on the holding of land, to the temporal sovereignty of the Pope, to the religious orders, and similar topics. The practice of magnetism, clairvoyance, and spiritualism is deplored by their Eminences as one great plague and shame of our epoch. Freemasonry, viewed " in its true aspect," not as a benevolent association, but as an institution having for its ultimate aim the erection of a pretended church universal of humanity on the ruins of aU religion, is said by several of the consulters to be the arm which carries the modern theories into practice, and therefore is viewed as one of the most potent enemies of the Church. The next point noted is the influence exerted even upon Catholic teaching by the Reformation and by rationalism. It is shown that in philosophy, as taught in some countries, the ancient system of the schools had been set aside, and, as all sciences are affected by philosophy, it not unfrequently occurred that authors and professors attacked the pure doctrines of the faith. Some of them even evinced a disposition to regard Rome as being ignorant of the relations of Catholic science to heretical and rationalistic science, or, at least, as not appreciating the necessities arising out of such relations. Nay, they even dis played some unreadiness in submitting to her authority. On the second point, that of the desirableness of holding a Council, nearly all the Cardinals were agreed. " In the present confusion of principles and systems, the whole episcopate assembled in Council, pointing out the way of eternal salvation to nations and sovereigns, and also the true relation between the natural order and the supernatural order, with the rights and duties of governors and governed, would be a luminous beacon scattering the darkness that covers the world. Perhaps in the presence of such a spectacle, heretical and schismatical societies would lay aside old prejudices, and would be drawn to a reunion." However, the unanimity of the Cardinals was not complete, GENERAL COUNCILS 59 One advised that the caUing of a General Council should be re served for times when some great difference within the Church demanded a settlement. A second thought that the delicacy of some of the points to be handled, and the want of that ex ternal support which the Church formerly possessed, outweighed any prospect of advantage. A third could not pronounce between advantages and disadvantages, but gladly left the decision with the Sovereign Pontiff, whom God always assisted with special light. Cecconi's statement as to the general agreement of the Car dinals appears to clash with that made by persons in Rome, who ought to be well informed, and who affirm that, at first nearly aU the Cardinals were opposed to the Pope's desire, and only yielded to his ungovernable longing to have his own in fallibility proclaimed. Lord Acton says the Cardinals gave their counsel against the project, and that the Pope proceeded heedless of their opposition.1 Both statements may be correct ; for even if the Cardinals had opposed the project when inform ally talked about, they might yield when the official initiative taken by their wilful sovereign convinced them that it was to be. One of the counsellors of Ali, the fourth caliph, when rebuked by Abdullah Abbas for giving bad advice in contra diction to good, previously given and rejected, replied, " When a person, either through folly or obstinacy, is found to reject counsels which are obviously salutary, he must expect to receive counsels of a complexion precisely the reverse." On the third point, namely, that of the difficulties in the way of holding a Council, the Cardinals held that great prudence would be required. The decrees of the Council would be re ceived with indifference by the ungodly and the worldly, or would be made the pretext for new trespasses against the Church. Then, as to governments, would they permit the bishops to attend ? Would they not prohibit the execution in their territories of decrees not conformed to the interests of those who held the power of the sword ? Again, what would be the use of new canons if the civil power would not further 1 Zur Geschichte, etc., p. 3. 60 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE the execution of them, or would even thwart it ? And besides aU this, the political horizon was clouded, and the Council might be interrupted. So far for external difficulties. As to internal ones, points noted were, the long absence of the bishops from their flocks, the risk of dissensions in the CouncU, and of consequent scandal— a risk which appeared the greater as the thorny character of some of the questions to be treated was considered. The Cardinals also felt that there was some danger that a desire might arise on the part of the bishops to extend their own privfleges, already too great, so much so as even to be hurtful to the practical uniformity of ecclesiastical government, as weU as to the firmness of ecclesiastical disci pline, and to the union of the bishops with the head of the Church. On the most important point of all, the subjects with which the Council should deal, the summary of the notes given by Cecconi is so meagre as to suggest the idea either that the views of their Eminences must have been crude, or that they did not care to put on paper such views as were matured ; always supposing that the summary really represents the whole of the contents. After a few generalities, the first particular subject named for condemnation is the liberty of the Press, after which are named civU marriages, impediments to marriage, mixed marriages, and such like, with questions of ecclesiastical property, and the observance of fasts and feasts. Only two of the Cardinals mentioned the subject of Papal infaUibUity. A third named GaUicanism and the necessity of the temporal sovereignty. Only one mentioned the Syllabus. The omission to name the SyUabus in this instance is one of a series of acts of reticence in respect of that document which are at least curious. It is not mentioned in the Encyclical which accompanied it. It is not mentioned by the official historian at the time of its issue ; and when, as we shaU hereafter see, the Pope solemnly confirmed it in the presence of five hundred bishops, the act was not mentioned by the Court organs. Further, the Syllabus was not mentioned even in the very document by which the coUective hierarchy expressed their ADJUSTMENT OF RELATIONS 61 solemn adhesion to it. Nor was the adhesion to it by letter of the prelates then absent mentioned till, as our tale wiU show, all this was brought out by the friction of events. Points in these notes to be borne in mind, as throwing light on the future of our history, are, that those who desired a Council hoped it would be a short one, and were of opinion that the powers of bishops were too great ; and that the rela tions of the supernatural order and the natural order must be regulated, i.e. reduced to rule. These two commonwealths, commonly caUed the Church and State, had hitherto adjusted their relations, at least wherever Rome represented the super natural order, by the rough method of trials of strength and skiU. The object of reducing their relations to rule would be to restore that harmony of action which, according to the Curia, formerly existed in happy ages, but had been lost in the changes of time. Naturally, this desired harmony could only be restored by each abiding, according to rule, in its own place — the lower under the higher, and the higher above the lower. CHAPTER VII A Secret Commission to prepare for the Council, March 1865 — First Summons — Points determined — Reasons why Princes are not consulted — Plan for the Future Council. IN March, 1865, Cardinals Patrizi, Reisach, Panebianco, Bizzari, and Caterini were appoined a secret commission to make preparations for the proposed CouncU. It was in the deepening grey of an evening in Lent that the red coaches drove down the Via della Scrofa carrying those Cardinals to their first meeting, in the palace of the Vicariate. Rome did not know that this represented the first move in the preparation of one of those world-representing displays which had some part in bringing on her ancient decay, and a greater one in gilding it over : displays which, while changing in the accidents of form, have retained the essential character of a sense-sub duing pageant, and retained also the purpose of binding the city to an autocrat. The significance of the display now con templated was to consist in showing both Ouirites and Italians that the world bowed down to the tiara, and so to bind Rome to the Pope for ever. At this first meeting of the Commission, Giannelli read a memorandum intimating his belief that France, Italy, and Portugal would prohibit their bishops from attending a CouncU, —more particularly Italy ; but as Germany, England, America, Spain, and others, would not do so, a considerable number would be able to assemble. This indicates a consciousness that political distrust of Rome was felt most strongly in Roman Catholic countries. After hearing this memorandum the Cardinals proceeded to consider the following questions, and gave to each the answer indicated — DECISIONS OF THE CARDINALS 63 1. Is the summoning of an (Ecumenical Council under the circumstances necessary, and opportune ? Affirmed. 2. Should Catholic princes be previously consulted ? Negatived. Nevertheless, when the BuU of Convocation has been issued, it would be well and becoming for the Holy See to adopt suitable procedures with the princes. 3. Should the Sacred College be consulted before the issuing of the BuU of Convocation, and if so, how ? Affirmed ; but in the manner to be determined by the Most Holy — or, in common speech, in such manner as the Pope may please.1 4. Should a Special Congregation be appointed to direct affairs relating to the Council ? Affirmed. 5. Should the Directing Congregation, after the publication of the BuU, consult some bishops in different countries as to the subjects proper to be treated, both in doctrine and discipline, regard being had to the variety of countries ? Affirmed. The reason which led the Cardinals to negative the idea of consulting the Catholic princes is supposed by Cecconi to have been a fear lest obstacles to the holding of a Council might be raised, and also lest the proceeding might be interpreted as a recognition of the supremacy of the State (p. 29). On the 13th of March these resolutions of the Commission were reported to the Pope, by whom they were approved with one slight modification. Instead of a consultation of certain select bishops after the convocation of the CouncU, he appointed that it should take place before. The first step in carrying out these resolutions was the ap pointment of a Directing Congregation, which was composed of the Cardinals of the Commission, with a few others, the number eventually being nine. That body was in existence two years and a half before the hierarchy generaUy received an intimation, in a Secret Consistory, of the intention to hold a CouncU. 1 " Juxta modum a Sanctissimo statuendum." — Cecconi, p. 29. 64 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE At the meeting of the Directing Congregation on March 19, the sketch of a plan for the labours of the CouncU was pre sented by one of its members, not named. He proposed that the work should be divided into four branches, and that each should be assigned to a different committee. 1. Doctrine, to be committed to the Inquisition, presided over by a Cardinal of the Inquisition, the committee to be enlarged by the addition of some members not attached to the Holy Office. This committee could be subdivided into sections. 2. Ecclesiastical-Political Affairs, to be committed to the Congregation for ecclesiastical affairs, enlarged by con sulters and others. 3. Missions and Oriental Churches, to be committed to the Propaganda and the Congregation of Oriental Rites. 4. Discipline, to be committed to the congregation for bishops and regulars, with the addition of consulters, canonists, and theologians. Each committee was to be presided over by a Cardinal, and aU were to report to the Directing Congregation, with which should rest the ultimate authority.1 1 Cecconi, p. 322. CHAPTER VIII Memoranda of Thirty-six chosen Bishops, consulted under Bond of Strictest Secrecy, April to August, 1865 — Doctrine of Church and State — Antagonism of History and the Embryo Dogma — Nuncios admitted to the Secret — And Oriental Bishops ON April 10 his Holiness sanctioned a letter to thirty- six select bishops of different countries, intimating under the most binding secrecy his intention of holding a Council in the Holy City, at some time yet undetermined, and requesting them to communicate their views as to the subjects proper to be treated.1 In August, nearly all the answers had arrived. Out of the thirty-six, only three bishops cast doubts on the wisdom of the project ; all the others were rejoiced. The letters of the thirty-six, according to Cecconi, expressed views on the present condition of society coinciding with those of the purpled in Rome. The thirty-six generally remarked on the absence of any special heresies. When we come to particu lars, the subjects which our author finds specified are : the right of the Church to hold land ; her independence of the State ; her right to control education ; her right to judge what promotes and what hinders religion. Among other matters noted, the chief are : the obligation of the faithful to adhere to the decisions of the Church, and in particular to those of the Holy See, and the necessity of the temporal sovereignty of the Pope, with " simUar points." After Cecconi has apparently concluded his summary of the suggestions of the thirty-six, a sentence is slipped in, saying, that among the verities which ought to be propounded by the CouncU, some mentioned Papal infaUibUity — " a doctrine ad mitted in all Catholic schools, with a few exceptions." Here- vol. 1. 1 Cecconi, p. 324. 65 66 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE upon departing from his general rule, and adopting marks of quotation, he gives the words of one particular bishop, without naming him. These bear directly on the point most agitated before and during the Council. Such English readers as know much of the controversy, will probably risk a guess as to the author, and it may be that persons in Munich will hardly stop at guessing, but wUl say they know. It plainly was no Bava rian, not even a German, neither of whom would faU into such an expression as " Munich in Bavaria." " At present there are but few who impugn this prerogative of the Roman Pontiff ; and they do so, not from a theological point of view, but the better to assert and maintain the freedom of science. It would seem that a school of theologians has sprung up with this object, at Munich, in Bavaria, in whose writings the principal aim is to lower the Holy See, its authority and its mode of government, by the aid of historical dissertations, and to bring it into contempt, and above aU to combat the infaUibility of Peter teaching ex cathedra" This language intimates that the science for which especiaUy freedom was claimed at Munich was history, which wants no other freedom than that of learning the truth and telling it, that of detecting lies and forgeries and exposing them. Even the Court historian feels the significance of this announcement of the mutual antipathy existing between history and the embryo dogma. Among the " isms " designated for anathema by the chosen thirty-six, those which have any bearing on divinity proper could be named by most ordinary readers. One " ism " to be condemned is regalism, or the doctrine that the king is supreme in his own country ; another is liberty of conscience and of the Press ; and of course the bishops no more forget magnetism, somnambulism, and freemasonry, than their purpled superiors of the Curia. Two points brought out under the head of discipline, are, the mobilization of the clergy, and the educational rights of the Church ; strong condemnation being levelled against mixed schools. DANGER OF A NATIONAL SPIRIT 67 After the secret preparations in Rome had been continued for nearly twelve months, the circle of confidential advisers was further extended. On November 17, 1865, the Cardinal President of the Directing Congregation communicated the intention of his Holiness to the nuncios in Paris, Vienna, Munich, Madrid, and Brussels ; and requested them to name canonists and theologians of sound principles, exemplary life, and distinguished learning who might be called up to Rome to serve on the preparatory committees. The next extension of the circle was to the Oriental bishops, who were consulted by Cardinal Barnabo, the Perfect of the Propaganda. They hailed the prospect of a Council, hoping that it might at length remove barriers which held the East in separation from Rome. Of these barriers they name both ancient and modern instances. Among the former the worst appears to be " national spirit," and among the latter we find Protestantism and the everlasting Freemasons. " National ism " is a trial to the Papal Church in the west as weU as in the east. Cardinal Manning, in the Pastoral issued just before the CouncU met, said — The definition of the infalhbihty of the Pontiff, speaking ex cathedrd, is needed to exclude from the minds of Catholics the exaggerated spirit of national independence and pride, which has, in these last centuries, so profoundly afflicted the Church. If there be anything which a Catholic Englishman ought to know^ it is the subtle, stealthy influence by which the national spirit invades and assimilates the Church to itself ; and the bitter fruits of heresy and schism which that assimilation legitimately bears.1 The clearest instance of the national spirit invading and assimUating the Church to itself occurred in decaying Rome. The military and absolutist spirit of the empire supplanted in the ministry and organization of the Church the original spirit of humUity and brotherhood. The spirit of the national pomps supplanted the primitive superiority to sensation and display. The spirit of the governing classes set up side by side with the simple code of Christ a new code, meant avowedly to 1 The (Ecumenical Council, p. 52. 68 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE restore the old Roman domination of law, under the form of a spiritual empire. The spirit of that 'domination claimed to impose upon other churches the will of the Church of the capital and did not scruple to call her the mother-church, and to support her claims with lie and forgery oft repeated. But after the Pope, conspiring with the minister of the Frankish king, and rising with him against their two sovereigns, had erected himself into a petty prince, the national spirit of the empire began to narrow down to the municipal one of aboriginal Rome. Ever since that time the municipal spirit has increas ingly become the spirit of the Papacy. Whatever that power has effected, it has never been able to make itself a nation. Aiming at a universal empire, the spirit of its rule has become more and more close, local, bureaucratic as that of any wee Italian republic of the middle ages. Men must not only act and move, but must also think and speak, according to rules excogitated by certain guUds within the Aurelian waUs. There is a curious but striking contrast between this pro fessedly supernatural institution and one which scarcely claimed a regular place among natural institutions. Coming up amid the decline and corruption of an empire older, richer, and more populous than had been the empire of Rome, the East India Company, in a couple of generations, made a nation out of some hundreds of States among which had raged yearly conflicts. That nation still contains many thrones, but within its circle, and in spite of their jealousies, no less than two hundred and forty millions of men, a family immensely greater than Rome ever cursed with war or blessed with law, now live in peace and freedom such as were unknown to the ages which had aforetime passed over their country. On the plains around the presidential cities of India, where a century ago Mahratta, Moslem, and Rajpoot were wont to ravage, now reigns peace at seed-time and peace at harvest. Security sits and sings on every tree, and Industry, building her nest in every bush, sends out broods that, free from fear, busily cover the land. What a contrast with the endless whirl of war which in what are called the Ages of Faith— ages when the spells of the chief INFLATED NOTIONS OF IMPORTANCE 69 priest in Rome had power over semi-barbarous chiefs — ever eddied on the plain around Rome, a glorious plain, growing waste and more and more waste, whUe kings came, now to be crowned, now to put a Pope in prison, and whUe Italians and foreigners rose and sank by turn in the alternating surges — foreigners, however, most frequently coming into the fight at the call of a self-asserting but mongrel and parasitical government, which claimed to be the heaven-sent superior, not only of commercial corporations like the East-India Com pany, but also of the very kings and emperors whom it played off against one another, and on whom it had always to rely. A national spirit indeed ! Such a national spirit as we see in reformed countries, and as was once in an inferior degree seen in the GaUican nation, is large, tolerant, and magnanimous compared with the tight, pretentious municipal spirit uncon sciously depicted by Liverani when he enumerates the small men from smaU towns, puffed up with the name of cities, who, in the Curia, sweUed themselves out with notions of world- commanding importance — notions rendered possible only by their own helpless narrowness. CHAPTER IX Interruption of Preparations for Fourteen Months, through the conse quences of Sadowa— The French evacuate Rome — AUeged Double Dealing of Napoleon HI— Civiltd on St. Bartholomew's— Change of Plan — Instead of a Council a Great Display — Serious Complaints of Liberal Catholics IT was on May 24, 1866, that the Directing Congregation held its third meeting, Monsignor Nina acting as secre tary in the absence of Giannelli, who was indisposed. But, soon afterwards, dark clouds enveloped the Vatican, and ere the Congregation could again meet fourteen months had passed away. On July 3, 1866, a shell burst at Sadowa which struck in three different directions, and in each case the blow was heavy. Austria fell from the primacy of Germany, and from her place among Italian States. Italy, acquiring Venice, entered into full possession of herself, Rome alone excepted. The dis jointed members of Germany moved to union under Prussia, like bone coming to its bone. These were deplorable reversals of Papal policy, unfriendly both to the temporal dominion at home and to the spiritual dominion abroad. By the instrumentality of France and Austria it had been possible, for ages, to keep Italy and Ger many parcelled into small States, easily played off against one another, inimical to great national organizations or high national sentiment, and glad of an alliance with a small State possessing an organization by which it could interfere almost everywhere, and in almost everything. The long-continued success of the policy directed to this end seemed to stamp it as almost miraculous. Had Germany united under the Haps- burgs, ready to keep Italy disunited, it would have mattered less to Rome. But her uniting under the HohenzoUerns, and 70 THE FRENCH EVACUATE ROME 71 aiding Italy to become one, was doubly dangerous. Recon struction as going on in Italy and Germany must be met by reconstruction on a universal scale. On November 4, 1866, the people of Venetia carried their suffrages to the feet of King Victor Emmanuel, while Austria and France sullenly acquiesced. The king said, " Italy is made if not completed" — a hint which the Vatican both under stood and resented. Five weeks later, at four o'clock on the morning of December 11, Mr. Gladstone, whose name had already left a beneficent mark on the history of Italy, was watching by the gaslight from a window in Rome as the French troops wound round the corner of a street, and he felt that the seed of great events lay in that evacuation ! -* That day the flag of red, white, and blue which for seventeen years had cast a light on the Vatican and a shadow on the Tiber, was lowered at St. Angelo. The Pope felt that it would soon be succeeded by the red, white, and green. So that as if by a historical parody on the old furor of the circus, the rage of parties in Rome was once more lashed up by the blue and the green respectively. " Do not deceive yourselves," said the Pope to General Montebello, when he presented himself to take leave ; " the revo lution wUl come hither : it has proclaimed it : you have heard it, you have understood it and seen it." The Civiltd Cattolica, alluding to the " soporifics " adminis tered at this irritating moment by French journalists and diplo matists, asked whether France would hold the same language to Italy, now menacing the Pope, as she had held to Austria and Spain when preparing to assist him, namely, that ' ' any depar ture from the principle of non-intervention would involve a war with France.'* She had not so spoken to Italy, and would not do so, for had not BUlault said, "It is not possible to turn French bayonets against Italy." This being the case, France might hold her peace and not tease the respectable public with soporifics.2 When Napoleon III, in the discourse from the throne, 1 Quarterly Review, No. 275, p. 293. 2 Civiltd, Serie VI, vol. ix, p. 126. 72 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE aUuding to the fear of Rome being taken from the Pope, said that Europe would not permit an event which would throw confusion into the Catholic world, the Civiltd bitterly exposed his double dealing. Some would take this language as a pledge to uphold the temporal power, but others would see that it was only a shuffling of the responsibflity off the shoulders of France on to those of Europe. Had he said France wiU not stand it ? No, but that Europe will not allow it. It would be about this time that Viscount Poli and Arthur GuiUemin, a lieutenant of zouaves and a zealous crusader, sitting over a cup of coffee, saw five gentlemen enter the coffee house who were not Romans, but superintendents of a raUway then being constructed. One of them laid on the table a nose gay, so arranged that the colours formed " the cockade of a king hostile to the Pontiff "—doubtless red and white cameUias, forming, with their green leaves, the colours of Italy. GuiUe min, who was in uniform, heard remarks which showed that the gentlemen knew what the flowers signified. He rose, seized the nosegay, dashed it to the ground, and trampled it to pieces. Then, as the others grumbled, he drew out his revolver, laid it by his side, and went on sipping his coffee, and chatting with the Viscount.1 The Civiltd was at this time publishing a series of articles on the massacre of St. Bartholomew's, sometimes caUing it " the slaughter " and sometimes " the executions of Paris " ; and cal culating that there might have been some two thousand Pro testants put to death in the capital, and, say, eight thousand in all France ! Among his other crimes, Bismarck stayed the preparations for the Council by the campaign of Sadowa. The most reverend Court historian evidently has no sense of any need for giving the world other reasons for the total interruption of those pre parations than the political troubles. Yet one who learned Christianity at the feet of Christ would not readily see why the studies of holy men in the mysteries of divine revelation should depend upon a battle in Bohemia, or on the flitting of a French 1 Civiltd, Serie VII. iv. 418. THE POPE'S ANNIVERSARY 73 garrison. Surely, divines might go on searching into natural ism, rationalism, pantheism, somnambulism, and freemasonry, whether Germany was uniting or splitting up again. Never theless, studies in regalism and Caesarism in the regular subor dination of the natural order to the supernatural, and in the best measures for replacing the political system of Europe on the divine basis, or, as we should say, for subordinating civU and restoring ecclesiastical jurisdiction, were liable to be influenced by the flights of the eagles. And the augurs who were tracing the lines for the foundations of the reconstruction, found in the movements of the eagles of Prussia and France omens that counseUed delay. According to the original design, the CouncU was to be opened on the day observed as the eighteenth centennial anni versary of St. Peter's martyrdom. But, owing to these sad interruptions, when 1867 approached the secret preparations were not sufficiently advanced. Such, at least, is the only reason given by Cecconi why the CouncU was postponed. The Pope, however, was resolved to cover St. Peter's day with glory. So his own thrice sacred anniversary, that of " the Immaculate," and of the Syllabus, was once more signalized by the issue of letters to the bishops of the whole world, citing them to Rome for the 29th of the ensuing June. They were not only to celebrate the centenary of Peter's martyrdom, but to take part in the canonization of some twenty additional saints, and also to attend certain consistories. The second name upon the list of the " new patrons in the presence of God " about to be created was that of Peter de Arbues, " Spanish inquisitor and martyr," *¦ of whose canonization we shall hear again. This invitation was dated three days before the French evacuated Rome. As trusty bayonets were faUing, additional celestial powers were to be called into the firmament. AU this time the Liberal Catholics were becoming increas ingly uneasy at the prospect of the dangers on which the Church was drifting. They had hoped to see her first embrace and then dominate modern culture and liberties. This was a dream 1 Cecconi, p. 133. 74 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE of O'Connell, of Lammenais, and of Gioberti. At this aimed the erudite and steadfast German Catholics. But every new utter ance of the Court, whether in official document or inspired organ, showed that it was determined upon dragging the Church in an opposite direction. According to the policy to which it had fully committed itself, the Church was to conquer, not by adopt ing the modern age, but by restoring the middle ages. The dominion of the Pontiff over the whole earth as spiritual despot and temporal suzerain was the ideal to which everything must give way. Montalembert, who had been flattered by the open ing career of Pius IX, as sailors say they are flattered by what they call foxy weather, expresses himself as foUows : " I began as early as 1852 to wrestle against the detestable political and religious aberrations summed up in contemporary Ultramon- tanism." He showed that when in 1847 he defended the Jesuits of the Sonderbund against Thiers, as he did with equal eloquence and want of foresight, he did not utter one word of the modern doctrines, and that for a good reason, because, he says, " No one had thought of setting them up when I entered on public life." Indeed, he affirms that, in 1847, Gallicanism was dead, but that it had been revived through the encouragement given to extreme pretensions during the pontificate of Pius IX. He then quotes an important letter addressed to himself, in 1863, by Sibour, at that time Archbishop of Paris — The new Ultramontane school is conducting us to a twofold idolatry — idolatry of the temporal power and idolatry of the spiritual power. When you, like myself, made a splendid profession of Ultramontanism, you did not understand things in this fashion. We defended the independence of the spiritual power against the usurpations and pretensions of the temporal power ; but we re spected the constitution of the State and the constitution of the Church. We did not sweep away every intermediate power, or every gradation of order, nor yet every legitimate resistance, nor all individuahty and spontaneity. The Pope and the Emperor were not then — the former the whole Church, the latter the whole State. Montalembert goes on to say that the old Ultramontanes had recognized the right of the Pope, in a great crisis, to rise above THE LEAP DOWNWARD 75 all rules ; but they did not confound the exception with the rule. These cares and apprehensions were for the time con cealed, and were only brought to light by the anguish of that moment when the final leap downward was about to place a gulf that could never be re-crossed between Rome and all things free and equal. But when the expression did come, it bore with it the record of previous irritations. " The Ultramontane bishops," said Montalembert, " have pushed everything to the extreme, and have argued to the utmost against all liberties, those of the State as well as those of the Church. " If such a system was not of a nature to compromise the gravest interests of rehgion, in the present, but much more in the future, we might content ourselves with despising it ; but when one has the presentiment of the ills which are being prepared for us, it is difficult to be silent and resigned." 1 Letter quoted in the Unitd Cattolica, March 10, 1870. Friedberg, pp. 118-121. CHAPTER X Reprimand of Darboy, Archbishop of Paris, for disputing the Ordinary and Immediate Jurisdiction of the Pope in his Diocese — Sent in 1864, Published in 1869. WITHIN a twelvemonth of the issue of the SyUabus, letters of significance were passing between Paris and Rome. One of those letters throws light on the steps taken to grind down any bishop who dared to assert, as bishops used to do, some authority for their own office, independent of the direct and universal meddling of Rome. That some prelates were still tempted to this offence we have seen hinted by the Cardinal consulters, in the original notes upon the question of holding a Council. One of the most considerable figures in the hierarchy was Darboy, Archbishop of Paris, to whose name a historical death has given tragic immortality. When the preparations for the issue of the Syllabus must have been far advanced, in 1864, he had drawn upon himself letters of censure from Rome. To these he had replied both publicly in the senate, and privately, in a manner which showed that some remnants of old French doctrines yet survived the modern influence in primary schools and episcopal seminaries. And wherever any sense of the ancient office of a bishop did survive, there was constant irrita tion in the condition of dependence to which the system of quinquennial faculties reduced the men who, bearing the old name, held the modern post under the bureaux in Rome. Only a few weeks before the Magna Charta of reconstruction was promulged, on October 26, 1864, a letter was addressed to Darboy which fiUs no less than ten octavo pages of smaU type in the documents of Friedberg.1 Besides its solid value as 1 Aktenstucke, pp. 257-67. 78 DIFFICULTIES OF THE BISHOPS 77 instruction, this epistle has the interest of a sharp lecture. Furthermore, its very language coloured the most important of the Vatican decrees. The quarrel arises on the old subject of the " exemption " of the regulars from episcopal control, and the direct action of the Curia in a diocese, over the head of a bishop and under his feet. Readers of Church history will be tempted to think lightly of the Pope's candour when he speaks of Darboy's complaint as a new one, but however this suspicion may touch those who furnished the materials for the letter, it does not attach to the Pope personaUy, for he is not usuaUy supposed to read history, though he often sets it to rights. If inaccurate in his facts, Pius IX is orthodox in his policy, for just as bishops must be independent of the government of the country, so must the regulars be independent of the bishops, that power to set wheels in motion may be carried from the engine-house in Rome into the midst of a nation by two per fectly independent shafts. When the Church is a national one, a bishop has some stake in the country, though slight com pared with his stake at the Vatican ; and he must, at all events, keep up relations with the authorities. The former circumstance brings temptations to a " national spirit " — one of the standing evils cried down by the Curia. The latter circumstance may make it convenient that the bishop should not always know what is really the course of action being prepared. In both points of view the regulars can be utilized. Darius took care to have three separate powers in each province, all directly dependent on the Imperial Court alone.1 And from his days highly organized Asiatic governments have had, besides the apparently omnipotent lieutenants, confidential agents in every province, depending directly on the metropolitan authorities. The Pontiff commences his.letter by reminding his venerable brother that he made professions of devotion to the Holy See on his elevation to that of Paris. Then he tells him that certain of his letters replying to animadversions of the Pope, show him 1 Rawlinson's Ancient Monarchies, vol, iv. 78 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE to hold views opposed to the divine primacy of the Roman Pontiff over the whole Church. Darboy had asserted that the power of the Pope, in a diocese other than his own, was not ordinary and immediate, but such as should be interposed only as a last resource, in cases of manifest necessity. He had represented the intervention of the Pope, by the exercise of ordinary and immediate jurisdiction, as turning a diocese into a mission, and a bishop into a vicar apostolic. Moreover, he had said, in the French senate, that when such intervention took place at the private instance of individuals, it rendered the ad ministration of the diocese aU but impossible ; and he had added that regulars, Nuncio, and Curia all aimed at bringing about such intervention as an ordinary thing, and that he would resist it and caU upon the bishops and people to do so. He had even spoken of submitting letters apostolic to the government, and of having recourse to the lay power ; nay, he had gone so far as to mention the Organic articles, though he could not be ignorant of how the Holy See had always pro tested against them. The Pope could scarcely believe that his venerable brother had uttered such things, and was moved with wonder and anguish at finding him avowing the condemned opinions of Febronius, which a bishop ought to abhor. In denying the " immediate and ordinary " jurisdiction of the Pope, he had denied the decree of the fourth Lateran CouncU. The words " feed My lambs, feed My sheep " mean that believers aU and singular are to be subject to Peter and his successors, as to the Lord Christ Himself, whose vicar upon earth the Roman Pontiff truly is. Every Catholic would reply to the charge as to a diocese being turned into a mission, and a bishop into a vicar apostolic, by saying that it was as false as it would be to say that prefects, judges, or provincial magistrates were not ordinary magistrates, because a direct, immediate, and ordinary power was held by the king or emperor. St. Thomas Aquinas, continues the letter, had said "the Pope has a plenitude of pontifical power, as a king in his king dom, but bishops are received into a share of the solicitude, like REPRIMAND OF DARBOY 79 judges set over particular cities." As a Catholic bishop, Darboy ought to know that all had a right to appeal to Rome, none to appeal from her. Such a complaint as that the interference of Rome rendered the administration of a diocese almost impossible had never been made either in past ages or in the present one. When Darboy spoke of appealing to bishops and people, he ought to have known that the same had been done by Febronius, and that it was an offence against the divine Author of the constitution of the Church. The Archbishop had not been informed against, proceeded the Pope, by the regulars, but, from other quarters the fact came before his Holiness that the Archbishop had exercised the right of visitation over them, on which he had been admonished, and of this admonition he had been pleased to speak, in the senate, as of a sentence delivered without the cause having been heard. It was hardly to be believed ! The Archbishop knew the Decretals, and knew how, in aU ages, the Popes had written in the same manner to bishops when they became aware of something in their sees which was not quite right. As it was a question of the visitation of regulars, it must be remembered that the right of exemption had long been enjoyed by the Jesuits and Franciscans in Paris, and that the Apostolic See had exercised its own special or " privative " jurisdiction. Darboy had aUeged that, by the law of the CouncU of Trent, regulars could not have canonical existence in any diocese with out consent of the bishop, which consent had never been received by the monks in question. But, having been long on the ground, they had acquired a prescriptive right, by virtual, if not by express, consent of successive bishops. And as to the fact that the civU law forbade them to possess land, of what use were such laws in ecclesiastical administration ? In these most turbulent and miserable times of noxious, odious rebeUion, civU law might even deny to bishops their civil standing. The Pontiff cannot dissemble his extreme surprise and annoy ance that his venerable brother had attended the funeral of Marshal Magnan, the Grand Orient of the Freemasons, and had given the solemn absolution while the insignia of freemasonry 80 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE were on the bier, and brethren of the condemned sect wearing its orders were present. The sect aimed at corrupting aU minds and manners ; at destroying every idea of honesty, virtue, truth, and justice ; at diffusing monstrous opinions and abom inable vices, fostering detestable crimes, and undermining all legitimate authority ; yea, at overturning the Catholic Church and civil society, and at expeUing God from heaven. His Holiness cannot pass over the fact that it has come to his ears that an opinion has been expressed to the effect that acts of the Holy See do not compel obedience unless the civU govern ment has given authority to carry them out. This opinion is pernicious, erroneous, and injurious to the authority of the Holy See and to the interests of the faithful. Furthermore, the Pope's venerable brother had incorrectly asserted in his speech that Benedict XIV in his Concordat with the King of Sar dinia had agreed that the royal sanction should be required before pontifical acts were carried into execution ; and that according to the instructions annexed to the Concordat, they were to be submitted to the senate, except when they dealt with matters of dogma or morals ; which false assertion the vener able brother would not have made had he weighed the words of the instructions. The letter concludes with protestations of the Pope's affection for his venerable brother and his flock. This epistle, after being long held in reserve, was launched into publicity at a time when Darboy's influence was threat ening to be inconvenient in the Council, and when the French government had requested a cardinal's hat for him.1 It is, perhaps, not superfluous to remark that the terms " plenitude of power," as denoting the prerogative of the Pope, and " received to a share of the solicitude," as denoting the origin and nature of the bishop's authority, are not merely happy phrases, but scientific terms fitted to express the Papal theory of the Church constitution as opposed to the Episcopal theory. The Episcopal theory, holding that the office of aU bishops is of divine institution, regards the Pope, not as the source of episcopal authority, but as supreme and ultimate 1 Ce qui se Passe au Concile, p. 16. BISHOP AND PREFECT 81 arbiter. According to the Papal theory, the authority of the bishop is an emanation from that of the Pope, who, as monarch, unlimited by any co-ordinate authority, retains in his own hands not only extraordinary but ordinary, not only ultimate but immediate jurisdiction over every subject within the bounds assigned to a bishop. The latter is a prefect, not only liable to be discharged or imprisoned, but liable whUe retained in office to have any matter taken out of his hands and settled contrary to his views. This is the theory which, like a scourge of not smaU cords, is employed to flog Darboy, while the incon gruous epithet " venerable brother," dangles at the handle — a vestige of a past age and an exploded theory. An emperor does not caU his prefect " venerable brother." A portion of the letter which will weU repay study is that indicating the attitude of the Curia to all authority not immedi ately within its own hands, even if in the hands of its " prefects." Against any such authority it will receive the reports of its private agents, and treat those reports as having the status of a legal appeal. It wUl act, if need be, without hearing the accused, and maintain that none shall appeal from it, though aU may appeal to it. This is the case even with the episcopal authority ; what, then, is the case with the civU ? It is swept aside as an unclean thing ; "of what use are such laws in ecclesiastical affairs ? " If Archbishop Darboy, strong in his character, strong in his see — the largest in the Roman Catholic world — and strong in his influence at the Tuileries, is thus treated when complained of by the Jesuits, what must be the case with smaU prelates who venture to provoke their power ? As to the Freemasons, one is tempted to wish to be in their secret, for then one would possess a rough test of Papal infalli bility. If they do not aim at overturning all government, and expeUing God from heaven, infallibility does not carry far. The time for the great assembly was now approaching, and, meanwhUe, the Papal organs were enlivened by the prospect of a war between France and Prussia, on the question of Lux embourg. When this hope was deferred the readers of the vol. i. 6 82 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Civiltd1 were informed that nevertheless every possible prepara tion for war was being pushed forward by the French on the largest scale, and with greatly improved arms. On the 9th of May, 1867, the deputies Angeloni and Crotti were called up in the Italian Parliament to take the oaths and their seats. Angeloni did so ; but Crotti, a weU-known member of the Ultramontane aristocracy, after pronouncing the words, " I swear to be faithful to the king and constitution," added, " saving always divine and ecclesiastical laws." This formula was at once recognized as being that which had been published in Rome by the Penetenzieria, with the declaration that the repetition of it was the only condition on which Catholics could accept seats in the Italian chambers. Called upon to take the oath in the form prescribed by the law of the land, Count Crotti stood firm by the higher law of the Penetenzieria, and the Chamber disowning his salvis legibus divinis et ecclesiasticis, refused to admit him. 1 Serie VI, vol. x. p. 384. CHAPTER XI Great Gathering in Rome, June 1867 — Impressions and Anticipations — Improvements in the City — Louis VeuiUot on the Great Future. THE whole earth had been moved in the hope of not only exhibiting a pageant outshining former ones, but also of carrying the dogma of Papal infallibility by an ecclesiastical coup d'etat, or, as it is caUed, by acclamation, without the delays of a discussion.1 Had this been accomplished, the legislative form of a General CouncU would have been rendered futile for the time to come, or at the most, would have been but a grander method of working the institution of '' consultative despot ism," to adopt the strict definition of Montalembert. The invitation had been enthusiastically responded to. The spec tacle of the Papacy menaced with the loss of Rome was touch ing, and the belief was cherished that a great demonstration of the interest felt by the Catholic world on its behalf would con tribute to ward off the perU. Besides these motives, another in fuU activity was the ever powerful one, especiaUy powerful with Romanists, the desire to see a pageant ; and this sight was to surpass all the former displays of Rome. The city put on its best, the churches were newly embel lished, the streets decked in festive array. Bishops came from all the ends of the earth, till the thoroughfares were mottled with the toilets of five hundred. Priests crowded in tiU, it is said, twelve thousand breathed the sacred air of the city, every one of them proud to tread that spot of our unruly earth, where the priest was king of men. Besides the clergy, came such multitudes of pUgrims that, according to Cecconi, the population of the city was almost 1 Acton, Zur. Ges., p. 14. S3 84 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE doubled. The Romans saw their famUiar rite, the worship of the statue of St. Peter— Vadorazio ne della statua di San Pietro —performed on a prodigious scale. In modern as in ancient Rome, adoration has its degrees ; all worship does not imply the ascription of supreme, but only of celestial, honours. No Pontiff in the days of the Republic ever pretended that Quir- inus was creator of the world and father of eternity. He was the protecting divinity of Rome, but with very limited powers in comparison with Peter, carrying no sceptre equal to the keys. Such of the visitors as had seen the city in former times, if not too much pre-occupied with the sanctity of the place to observe such matters, would find several improvements. Side pavements had been allowed in the main streets. Gaslight had, after long and painful efforts, been admitted. Railways had entered the walls. The personal liberality of the Pope had effected several improvements, both in public works and charitable institutions. The French had done a great deal for the cleansing of the streets, although the filth of some of them, and the indecency of some of the bye ones, were still beyond belief to any one from England. The Pope's army, which as late as i860 was an odd-looking array, was now a sightly and active force, composed mainly of foreigners, in large part French. And, finally, it had become possible to tell the time of day. Formerly, midday had been one of the mysteries of Rome. It seemed as if the right of private judgment, banished from the churches, had taken refuge in the steeples, for each parti cular clock went off at some mysterious impulse, and struck twelve at the noon of its own. Thus for good part of an hour, they do say often longer, the air continued thrilling with the tidings that it was just noon of day. Naughty Romans ascribe the change to Genetral Baraguay d'Hilliers, while in command of the French garrison. Having vainly endeavoured to get a standard of time established, he presumed, with French auda city, to carry the case by appeal from the sacristy to the sun. Placing a gun on Fort St. Angelo, with a burning-glass upon LOVELY ROME 85 it, he stole the tidings from another world which were not to be got from the temples at hand.1 One of the most powerful of the pilgrims was M. Louis Veuillot, who as editor of the Univers had for very many years done much to second in literature the work done in schools, of reviving antipathies and superstitions which were in danger of dying out in France. His notes of this visit form part of his two octavos. As soon as he reaches the foot of the Alps, at Susa, he begins to scold Italy and the Italians, takes every opportunity of doing so, and goes out of the country scolding worse than when he came in. But if Italy and the Italians were exceedingly evil in the eyes of M. Veuillot, he found compensation in the perfect loveliness of Rome and the Romans. The very cabmen are loudly praised, and the cabs carry " ideas ; " the Press, especially the Civiltd, is of course for above the French level. But the Pope was the grandest spectacle of aU. As he entered the Basilica, preceded by a train of five hundred prelates, it made an impression of power greater than if four miUions of men had defiled past, armed with the most perfect artiUery.2 NaturaUy, however, the imagination of M. Veuillot was most fifed with the prospect of that historical future which was about to open on the human species. Darkness still covers the chaos after the cataclysm, but the breaking of the light draws nigh. The news of a projected Council has reached the ears of M. Veuillot. His first word is, " Rome is officially taking the 1 This was first told me by a Roman tradesman, in presence, among others, of a very good-natured canon, who joined in the general laugh at my innocent surprise. This year (1875) an ex-officer of the Pope's service added, " Ay, but the priests bribed the artiUerymen to steal half the charge of powder, and to turn the gun toward the Campagna, so that the report should scarcely be heard." Probably the last state ment is a mere rumour, not representing any actual transaction, but indicating, really enough, the state of mind of the people as to what their masters were likely to do. I have heard it said that Sir James Hudson used to declare that when first appointed to Turin he could walk all round the city whfle it struck twelve o'clock. 2 Rome pendant le Concile, vol. i. p. 35- 86 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE reins of the world into her hand." Other expressions scattered up and down his animated pages are as foUows — The day that the Council is convoked the counter-revolution will commence. . . . Pius IX will open his mouth, and the great word, Let there be light, will proceed out of his lips. ... It will be a solemn date in history ; it will witness the laying of the im movable stone of Re-construction. ... At the voice of the Pontiff the bowels of the earth will be moved, to give birth to the new civilization of the Cross. . . : Here is the great reservoir whence the future will pour out and overflow the human race. . . . These days in Rome are a revelation of the state of the world, and the starting point of a renovation. . . . The pilgrimage of Catholic Europe to Rome in 1867 will have consequences of which the Moniteur [alluding to remarks in that journal] will be informed hereafter, and of which the world wiU become aware when the Moniteur would wish them to be unheard of. . . . For centuries Rome has not seen the Pope in such splendour, nor has he so mani festly appeared in his character as head of the human race. M. Veuillot is of course one of those who look on the modern liberty of the press as a great curse. We may insert here what came to hand long after these pages were written, as an illustration of the kind of Press that is to be quenched. The Times of January 26, 1876, in the letter of its Paris correspondent, gives a morsel from the Univers, in the style of M. Veuillot. The Times had said something about an interview of the Marquis of Ripon, as a new convert, with the Pope. The Univers devotes to that article " a column and a half of invectives," and thus winds up : '' The Times is now the giant of the Press, and prospers in both hemispheres. But the day will come when the two worlds wiU want no more of its agony column, or of its bad literature ; and its last compositor, inactive before his immense poison machine, suddenly idle, will wait in vain for copy which will never come." WUl the com positor look out of the top window in Queen Victoria Street to see if Macaulay's New Zealander has arrived on London Bridge ? CHAPTER XII The Political Lesson of the Gathering, namely, All are called upon to recognize in the Papal States the Model State of the World— Survey of those States. QPPORTUNENESS of the Centenary of St. Peter for re viving the True Idea of the Political Order among States," is the heading of an article in the Civiltd Cattolica for 1867. The first words are, " He who comes to Rome finds St. Peter become a king " ; a proposition of which we should modify the predicate, saying, He who comes to Rome finds a king, pro fessing to be St. Peter. " He (i.e. Peter) has joined the tiara of the Pontiff to the crown of the Prince." Why did not the writer say the ' ' tiara of the Apostle " ? That would be too great an offence against antiquity. It is the tiara of the Pontiff, as if Peter had taken over that office from Nero. However, these are but the introductory notes. The writer proceeds to expound the political effects of baptism. Christ ianity has not changed the civU power as to its substance, but as to its relations, by making a change in the subject of power. That subject is no longer mere man, but man made Christian by baptism. This doctrine — which frequently reappears as the theological basis of reconstruction — is more fuUy stated by M. VeuUlot : " They will not deny that the true human race is baptized humanity. ... It is, then, baptism which constitutes humanity, and aU that has not been introduced into the Church by baptism is, in reality, only a sort of raw material, which as yet awaits the breath of life " (p. cxii.). In order to prevent any conflict between baptized man and the law of the Church, the civil power must be subject to the Church. Suarez is quoted to the effect that as a man would not be rightly const tuted unless the body were subject to the soul, neither would the Church be rightly established unless the temporal power were 88 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE subject to the spiritual. And hence, the political conclusion is firmly drawn : " The idea of such a subordination is realized in the pontifical government. Because, owing to the peculiar character of him who here holds the temporal power, it cannot rebel against the spiritual power, civfl law can never here set itself against evangelical law, nor is any political act possible which should offend against morals." The last affirmation wiU appear boldest to those who best know what political acts have been done in the Roman States, and in the present reign. No one of these acts could offend against Christian morals ! for the all-sufficing reason that Peter had become the king, and Peter does no wrong. Thus we find infallibUity, as received in the court creed, covering measures of taxation and police, as weU as lotteries and monopolies — an abuse of the doctrine made stiU more obvious by what foUows, in which the inf aUibflity of the Government is grounded on its immaculate conception, and consequently perfect nature. Since in the Pontifical States " the laws must be sanctioned by him who holds the place of God on earth, him whom God has given to us for guide and teacher, they can never be in conflict with the divine will.1 The infaUible Depositary of evangelical interests can never sacrifice them to earthly ones. Though in such a government the two powers [spiritual and temporal] are dis tinct in form, they are in complete harmony and duly co-ordi nated one with the other, presenting to lay States the perfect example of the Christian civil power." It is granted that lay States can never equal this example, but they ought to imitate it. By their very conception they can never be free from the original taint, owing to which it becomes possible for " the temporal power to rebel against the spiritual power." Not only is it possible, but, by their nature, they are predisposed to that sin of sins. But all rulers of lay States are to know that in becoming subjects of the Church the subjects of civil power have been changed, though the substance of civil 1 " I have no need to declare myself ready to repel and reject that which the Pope cannot do. He cannot do an act contrary to the Divine law." — Cardinal Manning, Vat. Dec, p. 41. CHALLENGE TO THE WHOLE WORLD 89 power has not been changed. We do not stay to inquire what may be the substance of civil power, after its subjects have been lifted above obedience to it by another human power, higher than itself in all things wherein the two may come into collision. In conclusion, the faithful are told that the centenary of St. Peter, by bringing together people from all parts of the world, wiU give to them the opportunity of beholding " a State in which peace, morality/and justice reign. It is like an oasis amid the desolation of the desert ; and it is so because the political order is in full harmony with evangelical law." The approaching pUgrims, in comparing the oasis into which they were about to enter, with the deserts from which they had emerged, would be able to judge by the experience of centuries as to whether, where Peter reigns, the lifting up of the subject above lay government into the supernatural order had led to the elevation of the laity to supernatural goodness, or to the lowering of the clergy to the level of political officials. Two writers, as dissimilar as Addison and Edgar Quinet, had, in some degree, anticipated the comparison here chal lenged, each speaking from a point of view suited to his own day and mode of thinking. The Englishman remarks how great is the difference between Roman Catholic populations where they touch upon reformed countries and where they are under the unbroken influence of the Papacy. Ignorance, superstition, and crime graduaUy deepen till the Alps and the Pyrenees are passed, when all these become strikingly worse. The Frenchman says that there was only one model country in Europe. This was correct ; for France had never cast out the influence of the Reformation, or made away with all the Protestants ; and had, moreover, been the hotbed of what Quinet caUs the phUosophers. Italy, again, had always been a stronghold of the so-caUed philosophers, although all the Protestants had been consumed. In Spain, however, as he points out, the Inquisition had reaUy fulfilled its mission ; both Protestants and philosophers having been annihilated, schools and letters having been reduced to order, and the whole nation having been made to move for more than two hundred years 90 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE on the Papal lines. The consequence was the total ruin of religion in the country .*• The comparison to which strangers were chaUenged by the Curia had the great advantage of being a comparison of good, not of evil. If the Papal States are to lay States as the oasis to the desert, proof actually lies before us of something more than human superiority — of something amounting to a higher dispensation. If the Papal States are but moderately superior to others, proof of any higher dispensation faUs ; but proof of human superiority remains . If they are only equal to lay States even proof of human superiority faUs. If they are inferior, proof fails both of divine commission and of human superiority, and proof arises of the presence of greater human fault. The only true book of Positive PhUosophy yet (we do not say of Positive Science) is the blessed old Books of books. It brings everything to the test of fruits. It puts the extraordin ary man to the test before ordinary men. He who refuses the ordained appeal to the Word, and to fruits, and to the verdict of every man's conscience, writes his own description as a false prophet. We shaU not, therefore, set out to compare evU, but good. We shaU not inquire if there are more waste acres in the Papal States, more filthy huts, more wretched villages, more mean little towns called cities, more blighted prospects, talents thrown to waste, and families brought to decay, more liars, thieves, drunkards, blasphemers, and libertines, more depraved homes, more guilty conspiracies, more strikers, robbers, and assassins, more beggars in the streets, more idlers and extortioners in office, more wretches in prison, and more dead men in graves dug by the law, than, say, in our own far from immaculate or infallible England. We shall only look for the opposite of aU these, and more of it — so much more as would furnish proof of a special dispensation of God's loving-kindness to men. In one particular, such of the pilgrims as had heard of the desolation of the Roman Campagna would feel surprise, some what similar to that often felt by traveUers in the Desert of i Ultramontanism et la Societe Moderne. DWELLING IN THE PAPAL STATES 91 Sinai. The latter, expecting to find extended plains of burning sand — a Sahara — find a country like another, only that it has no vegetation. So when pUgrims on the Campagna found green plains basking under a lovely sky, they would wonder how men could call it waste. Only by degrees would they realize the fact that there were no farm-houses, no labourers' cottages, no hamlets. In Arabia vegetation has failed, and with it animal existence. This region is a degree less desert : the herb enjoys life and supports the beast ; only man has failed. A trained observer seeing the plain forsaken and the villages in mihtary positions on the heights, would at once say, as he would in Syria : The land has not learned what rest is ! It has not yet experienced, for any continuance, that lot of con scious security in which the famUy suffices to itself, the lonely house is safe, and the village needs neither wall nor steep. The valleys of Tuscany or Piedmont tell a better tale of law and government. When, at wide intervals, an inn or what is caUed a Tenuia occurs, perhaps it is announced by a few fine children, ill-clad and begging. The house has an expression of fear. The windows are few and smaU, and the yard, instead of a fence or low wall, is defended by a high one. There'are no stack yards, no farm store and treasure spreading securely and ornamentally around as if conscious of strong, benign protectors. There is no grass-plot, no gravelled or flagged walk, no flower-bed before the door, no flower pot in the window, no garden. The house has never blossomed into the home. It is, after all these ages, but a shelter from weather and violence. Entering, you find dirt to a degree neither easy to believe nor pleasant to describe, which grows worse and worse the longer and more minutely you observe. The furniture consists of a few stools, a rough table or bench, with a sack or two of straw for a bed. The few utensils, whether of earthenware or metal, are, like the stools and bench, poor in quality, rude in form, and Ul-kept. Scarcely ever is there against the waUs a print or photograph, an engraved sheet, a clock or plaster bust. You look in vain for book, periodical, or journal. The idea of 92 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE chUdren's picture-books, or of a cottage library, is out of the question ; and the Bible is not to be seen. If there be a picture of the Madonna or the patron saint, it is, in point of art, far below the pictures which often light up the cottage of our humblest labourer. If there is a book, it is a wretched dream- book teaching how to succeed in the lottery. No polished chest of drawers, no white dresser, no fire range bearing witness of taste and "elbow-grease," no pretty crockery, no easy-chair. You may perhaps see a man asleep on the bare bench and another on the floor. As you let the picture print itself, with aU its inevitable comments, upon your mind, it calls up comparisons with what you have seen in the unlettered countries of the world — not with the homes that grow up around a famUy Bible. Here the arts which bring Art home to the multitude have found no entrance. Engraving, printing, carving, ornamental work in metal, wood, or pottery, gardening, or artistic husbandry, are graces that have not crossed this dirty threshold. The aesthe tics, which have had some part in the government of the country have never developed the blessed aesthetic of home. PhysicaUy, you find a race of great capacity. The frame, if wanting the compactness of the French and the solidity of the English, is large and shapely ; such as after a few well-fed and weU-housed generations would probably be one of the finest in the world. There is a certain sluggishness, which is generaUy called laziness. Perhaps it is not so much laziness as a lack of that physical elasticity which comes with successive generations of hopeful effort and good condition, but sinks away under hope lessness, or the effects of poor food and bad air. The natural inteUigence is quick, and the manners generally polite, often winning. The pleasant word and the obliging act are both ready. But when did these carters and labourers wash ? Was anything ever done to cleanse these garments, partly of goat skin with the hair attached and partly of heavy cloth ? We do not call raids now and then to keep vermin under, an effort at reaUy cleansing. And the heads of the women and chUdren ! Whatever the prevalent aesthetics have accomplished, they have VILLAGES IN THE PAPAL STATES 93 never awakened the sacred aesthetic of the human person, which is not to be confounded with the lower aesthetic of dress. Turning towards the vUlages, the observer is again reminded of Syria, where he may have been led on by the prospect of a beautiful city set on a hill, and found a squalid village. Self- defending construction, as in the case of the lone house on the plain, reappears here. No outlying cottages before the village, no detached ones within it, no gardens or orchards behind. The backs of the houses form a continuous high wall, pierced with small windows, constituting an irregular but not despic able work of defence. Again you find the absence of any bit of green, or of flower-beds before the house, or of flowers in the window. The gardens of Nottingham alone would put those of aU the Papal States to shame, excepting such as are attached to palaces. Before entering the houses one feels as if it would be unfair to compare them with those of English villages in our more cultured and sunny counties. But we may take a Yorkshire manufacturing village, near collieries. There the ground is dirty with coal slack ; the air dirty with coal smoke and heavy with damp vapours ; the houses are of the colour of baked mud, called brick ; the sky is low, and more brown than grey. Nature and art seem to have combined to make the house dirty. Here, on the contrary, the ground is as dry as a board, the air bright, the walls of warm-coloured stone, the sky lofty, luminous and blue. Nature has done everything to suggest cleanliness, and also to reward it with such brilliant effect as we can only see in the brightest moments which summer lights up within our English homes. And as to manufacture, its grimy fingers have never touched the place. Yet under the unfavourable conditions you find tidy women, with tidy chUdren, by tidy firesides. The floor, seats, tables, drawers, dresser, walls, all show that the domestic arts of ornament, in however humble a style, are represented. The cottage chUd sits with its book on its knee, and you are not afraid to look into the corners. The Bible and hymn-book are probably upon the shelf ; and if you do not know that the 94 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE scene of the cotter's Saturday night is actuaUy enacted there, you feel that it might be. Under the favourable circumstances, on the other hand, floor, stairs, wall, furniture, utensils, and the persons of the women and chUdren are kept in such a style that one of the women from the Yorkshire cottage would not like to pass a night in the place. And you must not look into the corners. Any stray picture which may be on the walls, only serves to remind you, by contrast, of the wonderful development of Ulustrative art in England, Germany, and America, and of its penetrating influence in the homes of the remote and poor. Here, some times, you may find, even in the viUage church, prints and doUs, the former of which in England would be considered poor, and the latter tawdry in the village shop. Yet in the same church there may be some real work of art, which has for generations had every opportunity of forming the public taste. The land in these Papal States, like the people, is nobly capable ; but our present inquiries turn, not upon the future, but upon proof of immaculate and infallible government, for the last thousand years or more. Fixing, then, our attention on the works of man, we find cause repeatedly to wish that we had some measure for exactly determining how much progress has been made, amid these lovely scenes, by the human mind since it passed from under the dominion of Pagan Romanism into that of Papal Romanism. At present we have not the means of accurately settling this question, and perhaps we never shall have, though honest research may yet sufficiently elucidate it for a practical judg ment. So long as Christianity worked by its legitimate forces, those of the Spirit alone, with its legitimate instrument, the Word alone, it cast out the cruel and obscene spirits of pagan ism, silently, but not slowly. In individuals and in families real Christians were made. This continued so long as the ministers of Christ ministered like their Master, reading the Word of God, and preaching it, but no more thinking of per forming "functions," like the heathen, than He did ; so long as they had neither place nor name in the posts graded and INFLUENCE OF PAGAN ROMANISM 95 rewarded by human powers ; so long as they enjoyed no con sideration but what was won through wisdom, goodness, and spiritual fruitfulness ; so long as their whole inheritance was not a profession, but a caUing, which renounced the world, not by cutting God's holiest human ties, but by abandoning, for life, every hope of title, pomp, or power. So long as this spirit reigned, and whenever it again reappeared, they could point to numbers, whom they found vile but left created anew in Christ Jesus unto good works. But from the time when Christianity became a public power, the courtier, the priest, and the crowd began to flow into the Church, and carried part of their heathenism in with them. When the device of the Emperors was parodied — and as they had assumed the office of Pontiff to confirm the civfl dictator ship, the Roman Bishop assumed the temporal supremacy to confirm the spiritual dictatorship — all the three paganizing forces of statecraft, priestcraft, and popular superstition came more vigorously into play ; with the result stated by Gregor- ovius : " So that Church which arose out of the union of Chris tianity with the Roman Empire, drew from the latter the system of centralization, and the stores of ancient language and education ; but the people utterly corrupted, could not yield her the living material for the development of the Christ ian ideal. On the contrary, it was just they who in early times defaced Christianity, and permeated the Church, scarcely yet established in the Empire, with the old heathenism."1 It was, however, on the new system of conversion that the people could not yield the material for developing Christianity. On the old one they had done so. When the Church waits for converts tiU the Spirit of God brings her penitents, she will always find material (often raw and foul, but capable) for doing aU her work. But we find the first step in an inquiry as to the pro gress which has been accomplished chaUenged by the Vatican phflosophy, which decries modern improvements like the rail way, telegraph, steam engine, and so on, as "material progress." 1 Vol. i. p. 14: 96 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE When we ordinary mortals say " mental progress" we mean a progress of mind ; but when the Pope says " material progress," does he mean a progress of matter ? No ; then what does he mean ? Perhaps to suggest some such idea as the progressive ascendancy of matter over mind ; but if so, it is unfortunate for him, as a philosopher, that the inventions he despises represent the advancing ascendancy of mind over matter. And very unhappy is it for mankind that all his influence goes to employ matter in colour, form, and movement, to make man a crea ture of sensation, and to stay the operation of reason and of faith, exchanging reason for sentiment and faith for sight. Suppose that an observer before passing from the vaUey of the Sacco into that of the Anio looks at a historical place like Palestrina, situated on one of the noblest heights of the land ; a point whence Pyrrhus and Hannibal, in succession, looked with the longing of warriors across the Campagna to the distant Rome ; and whence the Temple of Fortune, emulating Egyptian proportions, and overspreading a whole hiUside, dominated the plain, and held forth its lights to the far off sea. This city has a Cardinal Bishop, and a palace of the great Papal-princely family of the Barberini, and yet is what a homely Englishman would call a nasty village. If such a one had to pick his steps up the aUeys that serve for streets, in the afternoon, when the issue of the cow-houses is flowing down them, he would rather be at home. The people are civil and apparently industrious, but the energy of the children goes out in begging. The decay and dirt which conquer aU, furnish to an English eye a plain instance of material progress — matter gaining upon mind. The palace is neither kept up nor abandoned as a ruin, but, as if to set the town an example of thriftless filth, it is used partly for an aesthetic exhibition, containing as it does one wonderful mosaic, with frescoes and portraits of the Pope and Cardinals of the famUy, and is partly given up to — matter. Just as confidently as a skilled observer would conclude that Middles brough or Cincinnati bore witness against any claim to great antiquity, would he conclude that Palestrina bore witness TASTE AND LABOUR 97 against any claim to supernaturaUy good government. How much lower was the place when it was heathen ? From the ridge between the two vaUeys, by Civitella, the stranger has one of those prospects of which no previous travel blunts the charm, and no subsequent travel blunts the memory. Here he finds weU-made men ploughing, and women with busts worthy of Sabine mothers carrying stones. Looking at the plough, he finds it only a few degrees stronger and better than that used by the ordinary Hindu ryot. It is very far behind the improved ones to be seen in northern Italy, and would be a real curiosity to Bedfordshire or Lincolnshire plough men. If the observation of implements is extended to those of the handicrafts, it confirms the impression of want of taste made by those of agriculture. But tools are not things to make a show, and the noble aesthetic of labour has not been fostered. Labour is not part of the supernatural order, only of the natural ; it serves but temporal ends. And who made the natural ? And who dares to teach man, created in the image of God, that the daUy duty appointed to him — duty to himself, his family, his country, and his race — serves but temporal ends ? If neg lected, are only temporal ends frustrated ? When our Father sends us what fUls our hearts with food and gladness, is He work ing nought but temporal ends ? For what is helpful to sanctifi cation commend us even to the stones on the head of the female hodman, rather than to the beads at the waist of the novice nun ! Albeit the former is a coarse tofl not to be seen without a blush by man born of a woman, yet is it a real lift at the load of life — a load natural and therefore divine ; whereas the other is neither work nor play, not tending either to lift the load of life or to cheer on the labour of lifting it, but tending only to weaken aU the powers by rendering the mind a slave of charms. Least of aU is it spiritual or supernatural. It is simply manipulation applied by the master with sensational skiU, and in the subject suspending thought on sensational routine. How far do the viUages_of the thrice beautiful Sabina exceed vol. 1. 7 98 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE those of our Lake District or of Wales in that poetic property of all viUages, " innocence " ? The last thing we should do is to set up our own as a standard. But if you hear the friars talk of the viUagers, and the viUagers of the friars and police, the townsfolk of the countryfolk, the doctor of his practice, and the priest of the refractory, you wUl hear mention made, with incidental ease, of crimes which, if committed in the Lake Districts of England, or in the tourists' haunts in Wales, would fill the journals for weeks. And how often here does scandal name the priest before aU others ! Do the towns in Papal territory contrast with those in " lay States " as the oasis does with the desert ? Suppose the ob server to stand before Subiaco, seated amid Sabine peaks in the smiling valley of the Anio — a favourite haunt of artists, and worthy of their favour. A marble arch marks the entrance to the town ; a summer palace of the Pope crowns it. A little way off stands the sacred cave where Benedict first taught. That is the Lupercal of Roman monasticism. There arose the institu tion which became the one grand public institution of Papal Italy — arose out of purposes not only pure, but lofty, though upon plans departing from those both of Moses and of Christ. These made the love of God in the individual a spiritual force to leaven the family, and made the famfly the basis of aU insti tutions. The monasticism of the further east made spiritual life a dainty too delicate for the fireside. The Christian system made each new convert a moral agent acting within the social fabric. When Christians adopted the Oriental system, each new convert was abstracted from the social fabric, was taught to turn his or her back on the famUy, and to caU being in the family being in the world, and renouncing the famUy renounc ing the world. Out of a life of three-and-thirty years spent among men, our Lord has left us scarcely another trace of thirty of those years than this, that He spent them in the family.1 This convent of Benedict stiU preserves its celebrated gardens, boasted of as a beauty for the whole earth — in- 1 The principle here alluded to is elucidated in an instructive manner in Nazareth and its Lessons, by the Rev. G. S. Drew. SQUALOR OF PAPAL TOWNS 99 eluding the bed of roses, the lineal descendants of those which were transformed from thorns by miracle. On the principles of Christianity, if this place has for ages enjoyed a spiritual government free from religious error, and a temporal one free from moral fault, and has, in addition, been blessed with the presence of the representative of God upon earth, we shall without fail find it a scene of enlightenment, righteousness, and bliss. It must in these respects be far before places where frail human nature has been in the hands of churches liable to err, and of governments which commit faults every day. If, on the other hand, they who have here been stewards of the unrighteous mammon have employed it UI, who wfll entrust to them the true riches, who will give to them the keeping of his soul ? At the entrance of the city, on a morning in May, the sound of chanting floats down the street, and a procession of clergy moves along, passes under the marble arch, and proceeds to a church in the suburbs. Then the priests bless the fields to secure good crops, as is done by the priests in India. The streets of the city paraded by this procession are not beautiful, and had they been steeped for a few years in a smoky, moist Lancashire atmosphere they would be exceedingly ugly. They are not clean but dirty, below the condition of any country town in the Protestant parts of Ireland. They are not busy, but have a listless air, as if people had little to do and not much heart in doing it. The signs of enterprise and of improve ment which in towns under good governments silently teU the tale, are not to be seen — signs which already, in 1867, might be traced in most of the towns of the New Italy. The weU- dressed portion of the people is smaU, and the proportion of those poorly but tidUy dressed extremely smaU. A gala cos tume even of the poor is fine, for whatever is for effect is studi ously done. Many men and women, evidently not in abject poverty, but capable of dressing up for a state occasion, are not tidy, but badly the reverse. The number of ragged adults is great, and that of ragged children very great ; it is hard to estimate that of the beggars, for even young women employed and not very miserably dressed, wiU take advantage of a 100 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE passing stranger to seek a penny ; and as to the children, begging appears to be a recognized branch of street life. A young gentleman from Rome, taU and handsome, on the point of getting into a carriage with his companions, anxiously inquires if the road to Palestrina is safe. Have there not been attacks of brigands lately ? The fact is not denied, though he is assured that all wUl be well. In any talk about quarreUing, the use of the knife — that is, the dagger-knife — is aUuded to as a common incident. When any occurrence illustrates the amount of confidence felt by the people in the honesty or truth fulness of one another, it seems generally low on the first point and almost nil upon the second. If the working classes show no sign of having been blessed with a government better than that of aU mankind, does any sign of it appear among the trading classes ? Beginning at the upper strata of finance and commerce, a merely English eye would look in vain for tokens of their existence. Coming down to the shops, perhaps an episcopal city in the " oasis " would so impress Roman Catholic shopkeepers from Thurles or Tuam that they would think a comparison profane. Their evil lot has been cast in a lamentable portion of the " desert," the misdeeds of whose rulers, and the wrongs of whose pastors and people, have often made the hearts of the devout in Italy to bleed. Protestant shopkeepers of Munster and Connaught would not be so awestruck but that they could make a com parison. They would not find under the fairer sky, and the theocratic rule, what they would take for symptoms of divine superiority. The shopkeepers of EnniskUlen and Porta- down, not blessed even with a heretic bishop, would smile at the comparison. As to the professional classes, they are nearly absorbed in the clergy ; for this is a state in which the only way to " found a family " is to begin by taking vows of celibacy, and the only way to bequeath coronets is to begin by renouncing the world. The one unworldly profession counts, among its prizes, a triple crown, scores of princedoms, ministries of state, of finance, and even of war, embassies, exceeding many#- palaces, honours DEGRADATION OF THE CLERGY 101 surpassing those of nobility, gorgeous uniforms, lofty titles, revenues of enormous amount, with powers and dignities bear ing a double value — one measurable by the standards of the world, and one immeasurable in the eyes of the faithful. The bulk of the land has passed into the possession either of corpor ations of clergy or of families founded by priests successful in their profession. The Mosaic economy is generaUy taken to be more carnal than the Christian ; but Moses, leaving Egypt, where the king and the priests were the only landowners, enacted that the priests should not hold land, and though married men, should have only a house and " a cow's grass." Here, on the con trary, the priest, though renouncing the world in some spiritual sense, comes a hundredfold more into possession of it in a material one. If mind shows its dominion over land and sea, over adamant and wind, over time and space, the feat is labelled for contempt as " material progress." If ministers of the Gospel become immersed in the management of manors, provinces, taxes, lotteries, and even of brigades, the fall is cer tificated for reverence as " spiritual " ascendancy. In Israel the royal tribe was one " of which no man gave attendance at the altar," and the priestly tribe one of which none came to the throne. Here the priest is king, and the temporal prince kisses his foot. A favourite image is that of the mystic David, pastor and king in one. Here is the cure of political naturalism. The clergy of the Pontifical States included the two widest extremes of professional life to be found in Christendom — that of show and dressiness beyond what our courtiers or soldiers display, and that of personal meanness and social degradation to which no professional class among us approaches. Society seemed to avenge itself for the humiliations it had to suffer from the court priest, by the contempt with which it treated the clown priest. We once asked an advocate if all the priests did not read the Unitd Cattolica, and we give his reply, not as describing what priests are, but as showing what men of educa tion may say of them—" All ? " said the Dottore ; " weU, 102 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE nearly aU that can read." " But you do not mean to say that there are priests who cannot read ? " " WeU, not precisely ; but there are many that could not read a journal inteUigently, so as to enjoy it." The co-existence of fear with hatred of a dominant priesthood may be observed in any country where priests have been the governing class, and perhaps, after the Pontifical States, may be best observed in India. The Brahmans, however, have not in the popular eye so direct a command over the lot of the departed as Rome has secured for her own priests, nor have they any such pecuniary profit out of the faith of the survivors. On the other hand, no class of Brahmans sinks so far below the average of respectability, among their countrymen, as do the lower clergy of the Roman and Neapolitan States. But the contempt of the Italians for the priesthood is no more thorough than is their reverence. The man who wiU not introduce a certain priest to his daughters, wiU pay him to save the soul of his mother out of the pains of purgatory. To the Monsignore Don Juan, to use a term of Gregorovius, he will manifest profound respect, whUe in his heart he scorns him. To the not worse but less successful priest he will manifest contempt and spend some wit upon his vices, and yet, in his heart, wUl fear his occult power over the souls of his departed kindred. The worldly professions have no such lot as the sacred one. Except the show corps for inglorious pomp around the sove reign, the military sphere for Romans is narrow, foreigners taking the lead. Letters are no profession. The civil service is principally in the hands of the priests. The law exists, and there are men with the titles of advocates and judges. But if we drew any idea of the status and " chances " belonging to such titles, from England, it would be altogether misleading. Chief Justice Whiteside has shown how wide the difference is, and he spoke of the great city. In the little one of which we now speak, two English gentlemen, who could not find room in the inn, were directed to the house of an advocate, who played my host with assiduity and good humour, and charged CONDITION OF THE ARISTOCRACY 103 four francs each for dinner, bed, candles, and service. The doctors seem most like men with a professional standing ; and if they keep from politics, they have a fair chance of leading a quiet life in obscure usefulness. Yet is the whole world caUed to take this state of things as the model of the subordination of the layman to the priest. " The idea of that subordination," we are told, " is realized in the Papal government." The ideal ! This absorption, then, of the State into the so-caUed Church, this suppression of king, nobles, and people under the priest, is not an abnormal and monstrous lusus ecclesiae, but is the ideal of the new " political order." Any one can understand it — the king merged in the prince-bishop or else a vassal of the priest ; the noble the retainer and jewelled ornament of the priest ; the people the helots of the priest. That is the model. Here is realized for us the ideal of the one fold and one shepherd. The English labourer knows that his son may, like James Cook, walk the quarter-deck, or, like Robert Stephenson, sit in the legislature . The Roman noble knows that the utmost his son, if not a priest, can rise to is to wear pearls and stars at the court of a priest, and kiss his foot when he makes a great show. The kindly monk who, at Subiaco, shows a stranger over the Sacred Cave of Benedict, glories in far-famed gardens, which any peasant from Appenzell could teU him might be equaUed in some private houses in such a village as Heiden. Fame sometimes draws out the dying notes of her trumpet unaccountably long. The monk is careful to enlist your admiration for several meritorious works in painting and sculp ture, but to Protestants one gem is shown only by request. It is a portrait of the devU painted on the wall, in dark passages, and not visible except when a light is flashed upon it. This done, it appears for a moment, or longer, as the operator pleases, through one opening, fitted with real iron gratings, athwart of which the demon glares out of the gloom upon the spectator. Such a picture is capable of being put to uses that would meet the strongest views of those who call for something to strike the senses, and through them to affect the feelings. 104 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE As long ago as the days of the man of the land of Uz, the monotheistic way of depicting a spiritual presence was, " I could not discern the form thereof " ; and, surely, even in that remote time, the aesthetic was higher than that of the Sacred Cave. Following the smiling valley from Subiaco to Tivoli, one would, in 1867, probably see youths in the uniform of the zouaves, lounging on a bank, near one or both of the towns. Foreign mercenaries ! would the Italians say. Foreign, cer tainly, and some of them mercenaries ; but some, even in the dress of a private, would unmistakably show the gentleman — no mercenary, but a crusader who, in answer to the cry raised after Castelfidardo, has come from afar to fight for St. Peter, to " die for religion." Even in this mountain valley the vUlages stiU keep to the heights. Where is the squire and his generous haU ? — no room here for his magisterial office or commanding influence ! Where is the farmstead, full and cozy, warm nest of fruitful brood sure to store a land with golden eggs ? When the squire was quenched under the mitre of the abbot, the farmer was smothered in the cowl of the friar. Where are the par sonages and manses, homes where thought-culture is generaUy at the maximum, and external show often at the minimum, Christian famUies rooted in nature, blessed by divine ordin ance, where woman is doing what the Mother of our Lord was doing at the head of her house — famUies holier a hundred times than the "t religious " family, artificiaUy substituted for nature and gospel ? If from the list of bright names written up in England since the Reformation were blotted all that were first inscribed in the famUy Bible of parsonage or manse, that list would be more shortened than most men would imagine. From the Villa d'Este at Tivoli, with its grandiose, Ul-kept gardens, the prospect across the Campagna, when the distant city and its unique dome are limned against the sunset sky, is one of rare enchantment. Suppose that on these Sabine or on the Alban Hills you ask some inteUigent inhabitant if ASPECT OF THE CAMPAGNA 105 these are not the Delectable Mountains, the summits of the true Celestial Empire, where no act of moral wrong has been done by the authorities for, say, the last ten hundred years. Perhaps you might hear such a statement as we once heard. It was from a gentleman in the pay of the government ; but he knew that he had not to speak either to a priest or to that denationalized creature which Romans soon detect under the English form, a convertito. The statement may not have been correct. But it was such as under our unblessed lay govern ment is never heard. It was such as under a good government could never be invented. Such a statement, professing to be made from a man's own knowledge, one never heard in Europe, except in Naples under the last two kings ; but one might hear such in Egypt, and one could easily hear such, many years ago, in the Mysore, from old men talking of the times of Hyder Ali. The desolation of the Campagna is the true and terrible material progress. Here physical impediments to health and life have conquered, not being encountered by moral and mental force. What natural riches are here ! If England has wealth in its coal, how much has Italy in its sunshine ? How much has that saved in the last thousand years in clothes, bedding, and fuel ? How much in the wear and tear of buildings, and of implements ? How much has it given in ripening what we can never ripen, and in ripening quickly and perfectly what we can ripen but slowly and in part ? How much has it both saved and given in diminishing the physical temptation to in temperance ? This soil, this sun, and in addition the tribute of nations, poured out here for ages in aU the endless forms of Peter's gain — where is all that wealth gone ? Here we are amid the riches of nature, to which successive centuries have brought riches of tribute, and yet are we wrapped around by sflence, vacuity, and fear. Sleep not here ! whispers every friendly voice. Wealth of matter, poverty of man ! The Papal government is sometimes accused of bringing the malaria. No ; it only let it come and let it stay. Like many who wiU not believe in invisible mind, it would not believe in invisible 106 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE matter. ^ Thejmiasma] was the hand of God, and was not to be fought against. The Papal government is also accused of bringing all the foreign hordes who wasted this once glorious plain. It did not always bring them. It only brought them so often that had it been done by any faction in the heart of a country not being priests, mankind would have sunk the memory of the faction under eternal disgrace. Now, the sickly Campagna labourer, the thing like a Fijian hut which to him is home, and the buffalo, seem a meet monument to the memory of Saracen and Lombard destroying, and of Cardinals plundering, till only the grass was left. Who would have the heart to ask himself, Is this the proof that the oasis of priests amid the desert of lay States, is a garden planted of the Lord ? Roughly speaking, Rome is about the size of Dublin. AU the Catholic world sighs over the woes and desolations inflicted on Ireland by Protestant cruelty. Where has Rome set up a suburb like Kingstown, Dalkey, or Bray ? Where sown a tract of country with rich smiling homes like those which spangle the emerald from Dublin to the Wicklow hflls ? Where in the oasis could a bishop on returning to Belfast point to a creation of wealth and beauty made in Papal times equal to Holywood, or the Antrim shore ? And could his colleague of Cork dare to make the people who look on the lone banks of the stream from Rome to the sea mourn for those who hang their harps by the " pleasant waters " that flow within sound of the bells of Shandon ? Had the Roman Curia reigned there, the vale would now be insecure ; a wretched viUage or two, with skeletons and clouts by way of relics in tawdry churches, would crown the heights ; instead of villas, mansions, and cots, a monastery or two walled up to heaven would hold the best points on the hills, inviting artists, but perhaps ill rewarding them, while nursing idlers within and beggars without. And had Rome less reigned at Cork than she has done, a scene many degrees livelier and richer than that which now sur rounds the fair city would have noted the response of intel ligent industry to the boons of a very bountiful Providence. IS ROME HOLY? 107 Inside the capital of the oasis ! — capital of a region where for a thousand years, at the very least, no act morally wrong has been done by authority, true bower of a peerless Eden ! Let no Englishman say that these pretensions are not to be treated seriously. We should aU have said so thirty years ago. But now men from any nation in Europe, some blaming us, some vaunting over our return, will teU us that of late years more has been done to accredit these pretensions by a portion of the Enghsh clergy than by any educated class in Europe, and that more to adorn and sanction these pretensions has been done by a portion of the English aristocracy than by any privileged class in Europe. This is one instance more of the fact that not interests but principles are the safeguards of mankind. Is the city, then, morally the perfection of beauty ? Is it so rich in the Christian graces as to accredit the claim to be the central seat of an infallible power, the one spot on earth where it is directly touched by a divine authority ? The priest at once teUs you how holy the city is : there are eight basilicas, more than four hundred churches, and more than two hundred convents. Yes, but perhaps the " religious family " fabricated by teaching woman that her holy place is not the family which God founded, and in which every man has his own wife and every woman her own husband, may not in operation have proved a better thing than the Christian family. Poor creatures put into an artificial famUy where duties ordained by God are made void, and ties set by Him as strings in the harp of nature to make holy melody, are rudely unstrung — a " family " in wliich many of the things caUed good works are neither virtues nor graces, but vain repetitions of fantastic forms — a famUy where the obedience caUed for is not obedience to any natural authority or to any divine law, but to arbitrary wUl ; communities of poor creatures such as these, we say, may not in the long run have proved centres of holiness. When we ask if the city is holy, we mean nothing about basilicas, or churches, or convents ; but we mean, are the people like Jesus Christ, like a people prepared as a fit population for a sinless heaven ? 108 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE We shah in reply give nothing but a statement on one side from the Civiltd, and one on the other from the prelate Liverani, so that neither heretic nor foreigner, nay, not even a layman, shaU disturb the testimony. The Civiltd,1 after the occupation of the city by Italy, showed that one of its characteristics had been the perfect subordination of aU civil arrangements to evangelical law. Christ reigns, Christ governs. This motto had in Rome a worthy and complete application. Not only individuals, but the famUy, the city, laws, policy, aU social institutions, felt the salutary influence. In the metropolis of Christianity, marriage, education, instruction, the adminis tration of justice and charity, public and private manners, had to be regulated by Christian laws and evangelical principles : — Such to a nicety was Rome. It was called the holy city, that is, the city more than any other consecrated to God and forming the expression of the kingdom of God upon earth. And the effect of this Christian order was seen in the very virtues of the civil popula tion. The Roman people was not second to any other in piety towards God, and in propriety of conduct ; and not only so, but it seemed the most dignified, the gravest, and the furthest removed from vulgarity and tumult. The prelate on the other hand says — and we begin at the Vatican (p. 87) : — Thus came it to pass that at the Court of Rome, that is, the house of the lieutenant of Him of whom it is written, " The evil shall not dwell with Thee ^neither shall the unjust remain within Thy sight," turned into a sink of scandal and a sewer of every foul iniquity (p. 87). . . : It was always to me a mystery how the Roman clergy, rich in gold and lands till most of the Agro Latino is in their hands, with their splendid temples and sumptuous ceremonies, with their retainers diffused among all classes, with control of the charities, the pulpit, the confessional, the confraternities — how it is that with all these elements of power in their hands I hear from one end of Rome to the other the cry, Death to the priests ! (p. 87). : : v The particulars hitherto related disclose [in the Court] an iniquity only too deeply rooted, and even turned into blood and nature ; they disclose sores both inveterate and envenomed, hard to cure and hard to eradicate. It was this that made Clement VIII Will, i. 132. NO DIVINE SUPERIORITY 109 say to Bellarmine, " I have not strength to contend with such a flood of bad habits ; pray to God to release me soon, and to shelter me in His glory." Also the brave Marcellus II was accustomed to repeat a sentence of Onofrio, which I do not wish to copy (133). As to the people, we. shall give but one word. Liverani, remarking on objections raised against modern Italian rule by the " good Press," because certain houses existed in the cities, says: — It reminds me of a pleasantry of the old rector of the parish of St. Angelo in Pescheria, who one day said to me that when he took charge of the parish he found one house bad and one not so, turn and turn about ; but he soon found that they were aU alike. This editor is ingenuous and innocent as if he wrote in a land of angels, instead of in the place where not long ago a prelate-judge abused his office to the point of using violence with arms in his hands against the sister and daughter of the convicts, so that he was prosecuted before the Vicar and before the Holy Office, and removed from the bench ; but after a few years, the good nature of the prince being overcome by powerful intercession, he was reinstated in another judicial office. We shall not go further into this subject than to add that one of the bitter reproaches cast upon the Italian senate by the Unitd was that when the most noted and most respected living man in Italian literature and politics, Mamiani, said, speaking on the conscription, that at all events the morals of the barrack- room were better than the morals of the convent, the senate received the statement with loud applause. However correct or incorrect may be the views of the several witnesses from whom we have heard a word, there can be no hesitation in pronouncing that any attempt to show evidence of divine superiority utterly fails — so utterly as to be more than ridiculous. But if there is not divine superiority, there must have been false pretensions. The one or the other is inevitable; If the States of the Church have not for the last thousand years been ruled by the representative of God, they have been ruled by one who was himself deceived and a deceiver of others. CHAPTER XIII Solemn Confirmation of the Syllabus by the Pope before the assembled Hierarchy, and their Acquiescence, June 17, 1867 THE twenty-first anniversary of the accession of Pius IX occurred shortly before the day for which the great assembly of 1867 was convened. As the Court historian omits aU mention of the SyUabus when first issued, so does he also omit to say a word of its definite confirmation by the Pontiff on June 17, 1867, and of its formal acceptance by the episcopate. We are indebted for the details in this case to an author who published before the events of 1870. Important as the transaction was, we cannot find that at the time any of the ordinary organs of the Vatican notified it to the world. Many of the learned disputants in the controversies which were soon to arise took ground which showed that they were unaware of this decisive event. It was Archbishop Manning who related how Mass was celebrated in the Sixtine Chapel, and how the Pope retired, at its close, to robe in the Pauhne Chapel. Here the Cardinal Vicar, Patrizi, foUowed by the whole of the Sacred CoUege and the bishops, presented an address of congratulation, concluding with hopes for many years of additional life to Pius IX, that he might behold the peace of the Church, and her triumph. As recorded by the Archbishop, the terms employed by his Holiness in reply were of historical importance.1 It wiU be remarked that the watchwords, deprecated by the Pope, are not those of heretics, but of statesmen — Unity and Progress ; and no Italian or German could doubt what were the unity and "progress decried — 1 Centenary of St. Peter, p. 6. SYLLABUS THE "RULE OF TEACHING" in I accept your good wishes from my heart, but I remit their verification to the hands of God. We are in a moment of great crisis. If we look only to the aspect of human events, there is no hope ; but we have a higher confidence. Men are intoxicated with dreams of unity and progress, but neither is possible without justice. Unity and progress based on pride and egotism are illusions. God has laid on me the duty to declare the truths on which Christian society is based, and to condemn the errors which undermine its foundations ; and I have not been silent. In the Encyclical of 1864, and in what is called the Syllabus, I declared to the world the dangers which threaten society, and I condemned the falsehoods which assail its life. That act I now confirm in your presence, and I lay it again before you as the rule of your teaching. To you, venerable brethren, as bishops of the Church, I now appeal to assist me in this conflict with error. On you I rely for support. When the people of Israel wandered in the wilderness, they had a pillar of fire to guide them in the night, and a cloud to shield them from the heat by day. You are the pillar and the cloud to the people of God. Here the bishops learned, with the full weight of pontifical authority, that the SyUabus was "the rule of their teaching." Some explained the Syllabus as affecting discipline, and there fore hable to alteration. The Civiltd and the Stimmen had always asserted that it was purely doctrinal, and therefore above all change. In pronouncing it the " rule of teaching " the Pope settled that vital point. Some, again, had been tempted to think that the SyUabus might be laid up, like an ancestral weapon ; they were undeceived, and given to know that it must be tested in war. Such were placed in the dilemma of having to offer resistance to the sovereign thus surrounded, or of having to observe a silence which must ever after carry the effect of consent. Even if they did not feel with the Pope, that the foundations of universal society were crumbling in unprecedented decay, they did keenly feel with him that the foundations of his own temporal power were crumbling. Every doubter held his peace, and the Pope's act became virtually what, as we shall see, in a few days it became formaUy, — the act of the whole episcopate. The Pope is not fortunate in quoting Scripture, often showing 112 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE that he takes glosses for the text. He imagines that the " cloud by day " was not a piUar before the host, but an ex tended field of clouds overshadowing the widespread multitudes and not merely the tabernacle. BOOK II FROM THE FIRST PUBLIC INTIMATION OF A COUNCIL TO THE EVE OF THE OPENING (June 1867 to December 1869) CHAPTER I First Public Intimation of the intention to hold a Council, June 26 to July 1, 1867 — Consistory — Acquiescence in the Syllabus of the assembled Bishops — The Canonized Inquisitor — Questions and Returns preparatory to Greater Centralization — Manning on the Ceremonies — O'ConneU on the Papist Doctrines — The Doctrine of Direct and Indirect Power. JUNE 26, 1867, was the day of the Secret Consistory, to which not less than five hundred bishops from all regions of the earth lent their splendours. The Pope in his aUocution deplored the evils which had overtaken the Church, and, as he supposed, in equal measure had overtaken all society. And now, at length, did he reveal his intention of convoking such an assembly as had not been witnessed for three hundred years. He had firm hope that from a General Council the light of catholic truth would shine forth and scatter the darkness which enveloped the minds of men ; and that the Church, like the battle-array of an unconquered host, discomfiting her enemies, roUing back their onset, and triumphing over them, would spread abroad over the earth the dominion of Christ. Though journalists and bishops at the time bravely repro duced this martial figure, the Jesuit historian Sambin (p. 13), writing after the battles of 1870, makes the Pope say that the Church would gain her fairest triumphs by converting her enemies. The very name of an (Ecumenical CouncU, uttered in the tones of Pius IX, instinct with personal and official hope, vol. 1. "a 8 114 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE caused among the assembled prelates a movement of effusive joy. They felt that such a council would prove a " marveUous source of unity, sanctification, and peace." On July i, as sembling in the great haU over the portico of St. Peter's, with all possible accessories of form, they presented to his Holiness what they caUed a Salutation. This had been drawn up by Archbishop Haynald of Colocza, assisted by Bishop Dupanloup, Archbishop Manning, and others. It had been proposed to proclaim Papal infallibility in the document itself ; but this set the French prelates up in arms.1 Though stopping short of that goal, the bishops go far in their approaches to it. " May the unmeasured benefits assured to society by the Roman Pontificate," say the bishops, " be, by this deed of Thy providence, once more displayed to the world, and may the world be convinced of the powers of the Church, and of her mission as the mother of civil humanity ! " They were per suaded that a Council would have the effect of showing that everything tending to consilidate the foundation of a com munity, and to give it permanence, is fortified and consecrated by the example of authority, and of the obedience due thereto, presented in the divine institution of the Pontificate. Princes and peoples would not, " in the face of such a display, allow the highest sanction of aU authority, the august rights of the Pope, to be trampled upon with impunity, but would see him secured in the enjoyment both of the liberty of power and the power of liberty." 2 The words in which the bishops confirm their testimony of 1862, to the " necessity," of the temporal power are few and firm. They then proceed to cover the space between that time and the present. " With grateful feelings do we recall, and with fullest assent do we commend, the things done by Thee subsequent to that time, for the salvation of the faithful and the glory of the Church." This is a waymark showing that the old doctrine stiU ruled the practice of the Court, though long banished from its theory. The acquiescence of the bishops 1 Acton's Zur Geschichte, pp. 13, 14. 2 Acta (Freiburg edition), p. 35. SUBMISSION OF THE EPISCOPATE 115 was practically necessary to give the ultimate sanction to the acts of the Pope. Then comes the solemn adhesion of the assembled hierarchy to the condemnations collected together in the Syllabus — " Believing Peter to have spoken bythe lips of Pius the things which have been spoken, confirmed, and pronounced by Thee, for the safe keeping of the deposit, we also declare, confirm, and announce ; and we reject with one heart and voice those things which Thou hast adjudged to be reprobated and rejected, as being contrary to divine faith, the salvation of souls, or the good of human society." x So it was done. The Pope had called for the express sub mission of the episcopate to his own acts, hitherto variously understood and discussed, and they had given it in round terms. Dr. Manning, in characterizing their document as " The Address or Response, in which they united themselves in heart and mind to their supreme Head," 2 might well speak of " the gravity and moral grandeur of that act," for with him vastness always seems to prove grandeur, and an act of vast moral consequence this surely was. We shaU hereafter see the fact tardily come to light that absent prelates were caUed upon to give in their adhesion by letter, and did so. On either the Papal or the Episcopal theory, the Syllabus had now the status of Church law, and had become to all the clergy "the rule of your teaching." On the Papal theory, because it was the formal act of the Pontiff for the teaching and ruling of the whole Church ; and on the Episcopal theory, because the coUective hierarchy had not only tacitly acquiesced but openly accepted it. Yet it is worthy of special remark that the Syllabus is not mentioned in this Salutation. More than two years later, however, the Civiltd said, " There is no doubt that the pre lates had the Encyclical and Syllabus in view, since in these two documents are contained all the things which the Pope has spoken, confirmed, announced, and reproved in matters 1 ActaTJFreiburg edition), p. 33. 2 Centenary of St. Peter, p. 5. 116 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE of doctrine." J And even as early as one year from the time, we shaU find that the double authority of the Bishop of Rome, and of all other bishops, was declared to be outraged by Darboy when he practicaUy disowned the Syllabus. The next point touched by the prelates was one lying near to the heart of the Pope. They had been moved with joy on beholding the loyal faith, love, and reverence of the Roman people for their most indulgent prince. " Happy people and truly wise " — Felicem populum ac vere sapientem.2 So, who ever had doubted as to the Model State, it was not the five hundred. Were they sincerely ready to make the people of their respective nations " truly wise " by bringing them to look on that government as the model ? The bishops evidently knew that they were initiating a move ment which would test the combative qualities of both Pope and prelates. Every discerning man among them must have felt what Archbishop Manning expressed, " This event may be taken, I believe, to be the opening of a new period, and to contain a future which may reach over centuries." 3 Under anticipations so serious do these old men, addressing a very old one, thus conclude — Courage, most Blessed Father ! Guide the bark of the Church with a firm hand, as has been Thy wont, certain of gaining the port. The Mother of divine grace, whom Thou hast saluted with fairest titles of honour, will defend Thy course, by the aid of her intercession ; she will be to Thee the star of the sea. : .• : Thou wilt have the celestial choirs of the saints favouring Thee ; those whose glory Thou hast, with dihgence and apostohc toil, sought out, and also hast proclaimed to the exulting world, both aforetime and in these recent days. May the princes of the Apostles Peter and Paul stand by Thee !_¦..- : At the helm now held by Thee once stood Peter. He will intercede with the Lord that the bark which, by the aid of his prayers, has for eighteen centuries traversed the deep sea of human life, may under Thy command enter the celestial haven, all sail set, and laden with richest spoil of souls immortal.4 It is to be remarked that in this passage Peter is not honoured, like his successor, with capitals to. aU his pronouns. 1 Serie VII. vol. vii. p. 587. 2 Acta (Freiburg edition), p. 34. 3 Centenary of St. Peter, pp. 12, 13. 4 Acta (Freiburg edition), p. 36. PIUS IX. AND NEW SAINTS 117 Again, he and Paul are coupled together as if they might have been somewhat on a level. Perhaps in both points the bishops made an unconscious concession to history, but in the state of things now initiated, such jots and tittles were to become symptomatic. One aUusion in the Address, which would pass with a smUe in England, had great significance for the mind of Pius IX. It is that made to his claim to peculiar aid from the Blessed Virgin, because of the higher exaltation which he had procured for her, and also to his claim upon new saints whose titles he had made out. In the case of the Japanese saints, we have already seen how practical were his views. He was fighting for the territory of his predecessors, and, finding that he had not hosts enough on earth, he reversed the ordinary process of binding on earth and leaving it to be ratified in heaven, and now bound in heaven, by creating " new patrons in the presence of God," leaving it to be ratified on earth by a cor responding increase of forces. The vision of these new heavenly auxiliaries dazzled the imagination. Even the professor of history in the university speaks of the awful moment when the Pope raised them to their thrones as " the sublime rite, during which heaven and earth hung upon the lips of the Pope." * The expressions of confidence in these new-made powers, as champions in the thickening struggle for that patrimony which, though costing so much blood, forgery, and intrigue, so much dependency on foreign arms, so much slaughter of Italians, had been retained through evU report and good report, irresistibly remind one of Licinius when menaced by the advance of Constantine, under the auspices of one God only. Licinius feels the advantage he has in the numbers of gods on whom he can rely. " This present day," he, as reported by Eusebius, says, " will either declare us conquerors, and so most justly demonstrate our gods to be the saviours and true assistants, or else, if this one God of Constantine's, who comes from I know not whence, shall get the better of our gods, which are many, and at present do exceed in 1 Frond, i, p. 82. 118 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE number, nobody in future will be in doubt which God he ought to worship, but will betake himself to the more powerful God, and attribute to Him the rewards of victory; And if this strange God, who is now a ridicule to us, shall appear to be the victor, it will behove us also to acknowledge and adore Him, and to bid a long farewell to those to whom we light tapers in vain. But if our gods shall get the better— which no person can entertain a doubt of — after the victory obtained in this place we will proceed to bring a war upon those impious contemners of the gods." 4 Even if this does not describe what Licinius reaUy said, it does represent the view of the early Christian, as to the heathen mode of thought, putting confidence in a multiplicity of celestial patrons, in the lighting of tapers and such like. The name of Arbues, the Spanish Inquisitor, has been men tioned as being second on the list of those now to be canonized. Professor Sepp, of Munich, long known as a Catholic theologian and Oriental traveller, says in his Deutschland und der Vatican (P- 52)— Nothing was more calculated to degrade the Church, and render her unpopular, or to bring a flush of shame to the cheek of every Catholic, than this revival of the most disagreeable recollections of history. Had Arbues contended against the burning of heretics, we should have welcomed him, in the name of God, as a saint. But history gives us no information about the man except that he discharged the odious office of a Torquemada, and that the long- persecuted Jews brought him to an untimely end. The most that can be said for him is that he died for the idea of the Inquisition ; and for that he is to be set up on our altars. Many another Liberal Catholic blushed with Sepp. Baron Weichs, in Vienna, cried, "A single example will show you the difference between the spirit which reigns here and that which reigns on the banks of the Tiber. While here we speak of abolishing the penalty of death, there they canonize an Inquis itor, covered over with the blood of the victims whom he had immolated because they worshipped God in their own way." The Civiltd exclaims, " And men of this sort are to be reputed Catholics, and to make laws for Catholics. 0 temporal 0 mores /" 2 1 Eusebius' Life of Constantine, lib. ii. c. 5. 2 Serie VII. vol. vii. p. 23. REPORTS OF THE SOLEMNITIES 119 The Cardinals of the Holy Office had drawn up a list of questions on points of Church discipline, which was delivered to the bishops whUe in Rome, and afterwards sent to many, probably to all, of those who were absent. Lord Acton points out that these questions do not touch the depths of existing wants.1 And Michelis seems to look upon them as a blind, to cover the real point at which the CouncU was to aim. They are, however, clearly framed to elicit facts bearing on uni formity of discipline, and especiaUy on points of adminis tration in mixed questions — that is, questions wherein both civU and ecclesiastical authority are concerned ; for instance, schools, mixed marriages, civU marriages, domestic relations, and the like. The returns which the answers would supply would be of great value in the study of plans for reconstruc tion, and would seem to be of more practical importance than Lord Acton imagines, for the purpose of governing a mobilized clergy through bishops turned into prefects, by orders from one bureau, and of impressing through them a uniform move ment on both institutions and families, in matters affecting national law. The five hundred bishops soon dispersed to the four corners of the earth, carrying into their respective, spheres enthusiastic descriptions of the beautiful, the grand, the splendid, the superb, the glorious, the unutterably majestic ceremonies which they had just witnessed, and no less enthusiastic hope of " the greatest event of the age," when the princes of the Church should assemble around her head to overawe her enemies and buUd her up anew. We do not use the epithet " divine," but it is perhaps right to say that the Civiltd described the appearing of the Pope " upon the portative throne, in all the majesty of his divine rank ... the Pope-king, the supreme representative of the two-fold authority which rules the nations in the name of God." 2 It of course celebrates the " standards which represented the glory of the Princes of the Apostles," and does not forget the " twenty thousand wax candles." 3 1 Zur Geschichte, p. 4. 2 Serie VI. vol. xi. p. 165. 3 Ibid. p. 234. 120 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Archbishop Manning reminded his clergy that in the solemn adherence of the bishops to those acts of the Pontiff, they did not confirm those acts as if needing confirmation, or accept them as if needing acceptance, or imply that they had been " of imperfect and only inchoate authority untU their accept ance should confirm them." ..." They did not add certainty to what was already infaUible." 4 The infaUibUity, he con tended, belonged to aU the approbations and condemnations alike — not, as some " blindly say," by virtue derived from canons, councUs, or ecclesiastical institutions, " but from the direct grant of our Lord Jesus Christ, before as yet a canon was made or a councU assembled." This is a somewhat crude statement of the doctrine which all the Irish and French Catholics we ever knew in our younger days resented, when ascribed to themselves by Protestants. They caUed it the doctrine of the " Papists," and contended that Protestants wronged all such Roman Catholics as were not Papists, by caUing them so, indiscriminately. What we call " temporal authority," what the Jesuits have taught Rome to caU " spiritual authority over temporal affairs," was one point, and the infaUibUity of the Pope was a second point, on which the Papist was at issue with the Liberal Catholic. In this sense Montalembert and O'ConneU were not Papists. The latter says — I am sincerely a Cathohc, but I am not a Papist. I deny the doctrine that the Pope has any temporal authority directly or indirectly in Ireland. We have all denied that authority on oath, and we would die to resist it. He cannot, therefore, be any party to the Act of Parliament we solicit, nor shall any Act of Parhament regulate our faith and conscience. In spiritual matters too the authority of the Pope is limited : he cannot, although his conclave of Cardinals were to join him, vary our religion either in doctrine or essential discipline in any respect. Even in non-essential dis cipline the Pope cannot vary it without the assent of the Irish Cathohc bishops. Why, to this hour the discipline of the General Council of Tient is not received in this diocese.2 1 Centenary of St. Peter, pp. 33, 34. 2 The Select Speeches of O'ConneU. Edited by his son, 1862. P. 447. MANNING'S ACCEPTANCE OF SYLLABUS 121 The utterances of Archbishop Manning, though sweet to the ears of those who had the dispensing of the purple in Rome, were, nevertheless, hard on those who, as children, had learned that such doctrine was no part of their creed. In his day Alban Butler had proudly said, " But Mr. Bower never found the infallibility of the Pope in our creed, and knows very weU that no such article is proposed [propounded] by the Church, or required of any one." x Dr. Manning went on to declare that he had received the SyUabus at the first " as a part of the supreme and infallible teaching of the Church." 2 In this he proved how far he went before most prelates of experience on this side of the Alps and Pyrenees, although he coolly credits them, every one, with having done likewise.3 Just as the episcopate had been committed in 1862 to the temporal power, so was it committed in 1867 to the Syllabus. Whether a bishop believed that his assent had any constitu tional effect or not was now a matter of comparative indiffer ence, for his future action was bound ; and the Syllabus was to prescribe the decrees and direct the deliberations of the future CouncU — in fact, to be its basis and its guide. The language of Manning was treated by many Catholics as the menaces of a zealot ; but the zealot knew that he spoke for the Pope and the Jesuits. During the conflict now on the point of breaking out, many honest men fought against the supposed design that the Syllabus should receive " doc trinal authority " from the CouncU, whUe in the mind of those in whose hands lay their future faith, the CouncU was under the doctrinal authority of the Syllabus. The Council might contribute to administration by turning the propositions into canons or constitutions, but could not add to their authority. The anticipation of Archbishop Manning as to the political effect of the doctrinal change then impending was clearly recorded, and in terms never to be forgotten — Civil governments, so long as their Catholic subjects can be 1 Life prefixed to the Lives of the Saints, vol. i. p. 14. Ed. of 1836. 2 Centenary of St. Peter, p. 38. 3 Ibid. p. 34. 122 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE dealt with in detail, are strong and often oppressive. When they have to deal with the Church throughout the world, the minority becomes a majority, and subjects, in all matters spiritual, become free. We are approaching a time when civil governments must deal with the Church as a whole, and with its head as supreme ; and a General Council which makes itself felt in every civilized nation will powerfully awaken civil rulers to the consciousness that the Church is not a school of opinion, nor a mere religion, but a spiritual kingdom, having its own legislature, tribunals, and executive." 1 Some seven years after sounding this note, preparatory to a powerful awakening of civil rulers, the Archbishop, having seen some beginning of the results of that policy to which he was helping to hurry on his Church, could say, " I must add that they who are rekindling the old fires of religious discord in such an equal and tempered commonwealth as ours, seem to me to be serving neither God nor their country." 2 The language of O'ConneU, as above quoted, was not em ployed loosely. He spoke as a Catholic, and as a lawyer ; but, above aU, as a politician. Had his declaration with regard to the spiritual power been less explicit, that upon the temporal power might, though not without violence, have been open to an Ultramontane interpretation. It might have been said that he only meant that the Pope had no authority in Ireland, which either directly or indirectly sprang from a temporal origin ; for, in the language of the Ultramontanes, temporal authority does not mean authority over temporal affairs, but authority of temporal origin. His statement on the spiritual authority however, precludes any such interpretation. Even the spiritual authority he declares to be limited, both in doctrine and in discipline : it cannot " vary " doctrine, and cannot even vary the essential points of discipline, without the con sent of the Irish bishops. If spoken to-day, this reserve in favour of the bishops would involve nationalism ; and O'Con- neU's denial of the Pope's infaUibUity, without the consent of the bishops, would be heresy. Archbishop Manning, with a great many others, sought to prove, before the Council sat, 1 Centenary of St. Peter, p. 95. 2 Vaticanism, p. 155. NEWMAN'S LETTER ON THE SYLLABUS 123 that the latter position was proximate to heresy. So O'Con neU and Montalembert must always lie under the brand of having lived and died as proximate heretics. The elect champion of the Pope's faith to-day may, if he refuses to change, be the butt of his anathema to-morrow. NOTE DR. NEWMAN ON THE SYLLABUS It was eight years after the Syllabus had been formally confirmed by the Pope, and after its ratification by the collective hierarchy had been officially communicated to the Papal clergy in England by Archbishop Manning, that Dr. Newman treated of it in his letter to the Duke of Norfolk, in reply to the " Expostulation " of Mr. Gladstone. The assertions in that reply are among the most unaccountable known to the history of our literature. Still, such as they are, they have been made in a pamphlet bearing the name of an English duke on its title-page, and that of an English gentle man at its end. Moreover, they were received by our Press— and the fact is known throughout Europe — with perfect gravity. Dr. Newman (p. 78) asks and answers an important question as follows — " Who gathered the propositions out of these Papal documents, and put them together in one ? We do not know." After no more than three sentences he adds : " The Pope has had the errors, which at one time or other he therein condemned, brought together into one, and that for the use of the bishops." On the next page he asks : " Who is its author ? Some select theologian or high official, doubtless ; can it be Cardinal Antonelli himself ? No, surely ; anyhow, it is not the Pope." First he tells us that we do not know who put it together, then that the Pope has done it, or has had it done. Again, in the same manner, he first tells us that it is not Cardinal Antonelli's, and then more than once calls it Cardinal AntoneUi's (p. 91), as if his authorship of the document was an established point on which arguments might be grounded. Dr. Newman in this manner procures for himself a double set of premises, which he employs throughout, with frequent shifting. His argument now assumes the affirmative, namely, that the Syllabus is the work Of the Pope ; and now it assumes the negative, that the SyUabus is not the work of the Pope ;' and this is what the English Press with, so far as we know, unanimity agrees to call logical. " But," asserts Dr. Newman, " the Syllabus makes no claim to 124 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE be acknowledged as the word of the Pope " (p. 80). The very heading of the Syllabus sets up the claim to be accounted the word of the Pope ; ay, and his word in official, public, and teaching acts. The heading is, " The Syllabus of the Principal Errors of our Time set forth in Consistorial Allocutions, Encyclicals, and other Letters Apostolic, by our most holy lord, Pope Pius IX." This claim is not incidental, but formal and capital, incapable of being either over looked or put aside. No man's judgments are here introduced but those of Pope Pius IX, and of his judgments not one here recited is less official than are Letters Apostolic. " The Syllabus, then," further asserts Dr. Newman, " has no dogmatic force. It addresses us not in its separate portions, but as a whole " (p. 81). The affirmative is true, the SyUabus addresses us as a whole. The negative is not true, namely, that the SyUabus does not address us in its separate portions. Does Dr. Newman mean that there is a single one of the eighty propositions which does not bear the Papal brand, " error " ? It is very wide of the mark — no man in England better knows how wide of it — to talk about different brands, some more and some less damnatory, such as " heretical," " false," " impious," or the like. " There is not a single word in the Encyclical to show that the Pope in it is alluding to the Syllabus " (p. 82). This is said to refute an allegation of Mr. Gladstone, which Dr. Newman caUs " marvellously unfair." That allegation is, that the Encyclical virtually, though not expressly, includes the whole of the errors condemned. It will be seen by any one who refers to our own remarks upon the Encyclical (pp. 5-7), that had Mr. Gladstone read it as we do, he would not have written what he did. He would have written instead of it something to this effect, that the Ency clical includes the whole of these condemnations, not by reciting them, but by clearly expressed reference. What he did say, instead of being unfair, comes short of what is required by the evidence contained in the documents. The reference in the one to the other is formal. " In pursuance of our apostolic ministry, and walking in the illustrious footsteps of our predecessor, we have lifted up our voice, and in several published Encyclical Consistorial Allocutions, and other Letters Apostolic, we have condemned the errors of our sad times." This language proves that Mr. Gladstone in saying that the whole of the Pope's condemnations were virtually though not expressly included in the Encyclical, was within the limits of the evidence. They are expressly referred to, and those additional ones contained in the Encyclical itself are linked on to NEWMAN'S LETTER ON THE SYLLABUS 125 the previous ones as a complement, making them a whole. In itself the point is of no consequence whatever, but Dr. Newman has chosen to make it important, and for his theory it may have some importance. " All we know," says Dr. Newman, " is that by the Pope's command this collection of errors is sent by his Foreign Minister to the bishops " (p. 78). That is not all we know. We also know that the Foreign Minister did not, by the Pope's command, send it as the work of Cardinal Antonelli. We know that he did send it as the work of Pope Pius IX. We know that he recited in one and the same note, once for all, the language common to the two docu ments. 1. As regards what is condemned — " the principal errors of our times." 2. As to who it was that condemned them — the Pope. 3. As to the official acts in which he did condemn them, namely, Allocutions, and so on. The next assertion we have to note is made in a strong interro gative form. " How can a list of errors be a series of pontifical declarations ? " (p. 84). We reply, how can it be otherwise ? What does an error mean in the language of such a document ? It means errors declared to be such by the Pontiff ; a list of such " errors," therefore, is simply a list of pontifical declarations. Dr. Newman knows as well as he knows his own name, that every clause of the Syllabus is a pontifical declaration that the words there written express an error. Alluding to the forty-second of the condemned propositions, namely, that in the conflict of laws, civil and ecclesiastical, the civil law should prevaU, Dr. Newman says this is a universal, and the Pope does but deny a universal. A universal may be denied in two ways. First by its contradictory, which may amount only to saying in popular lauguage that the rule is not without exceptions. But there is another way of denying a universal, namely, by its contrary ; that is, asserting that the rule is just the contrary of what some one has stated. Now if Dr. Newman believes that when the Pope denies that, in case of conflict, the civil law should prevail, the Pope means no more than that there are exceptions to that rule, he believes what is in flat contradiction to the whole tenor of the Pope's language, and that of his organs year by year — language cast in forms as forcible as the case admits of. If he does not mean that, his repeated statement about denying universals is, in a technical sense, incor rect, and, in a popular sense, misleading. Dr. Newman's treatment of the Sentence (24) which condemns those who say that the Church has not the right to employ force, 126 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE is very instructive. First, he says (p. 89), " Employing force is not the Pope's phrase, but Professor Nuytz's." And what then ? Is this phrase, " It is an error to say the Church has not a right to employ force " Professor Nuytz's or the Pope's ? Next Dr. New man says that what the Pope means is, " It is an error to say with Professor Nuytz that what he calls employing force is not aUowable to the Church." And what then ? What does Professor Nuytz call force but force ? Schrader translates it " outward force." Dr. Newman does not venture so far as to translate it " spiritual coercion." The whole sentence is about temporal power and the use of force — Vis inferendae — potestatem temporalem ; it never glances at spiritual censures in the popular sense. , At the next step, Dr. Newman professes to " set down what the received doctrine of the Church is on ecclesiastical punishments " (p. 89). Does he do so, or make any straightforward attempt to do it ? Not by any means. " Ecclesiastical punishments " is a term of wide extension, embracing great varieties of penalty, from the deposition of an Emperor to the paltry penance of a nun. In aU this range of inflictions, the single point touched by Dr. Newman is that of corporal punishment. The selection of this one point proves that he was perfectly aware that both Nuytz and the Pope meant force when they said force ; and this fact reduces the talk about Nuytz's sense of that term to what it is. But having selected corporal punishment as the whole of ecclesi astical punishment, how does Dr. Newman set down the received doctrine regarding it ? By quoting a passage which, under the appearance of surrendering something, really claims something additional, according to a common usage with Papal writers (p. 89). Cardinal Soglia, as quoted by Dr. Newman, makes a merit of giving up on behalf of the Church " the corporal sword by which the body is destroyed, or blood is shed." This, however, the Church formerly never claimed to hold in her hand, but only in her power and at her beck, in the hand of the temporal ruler. But, in giving up the corporal sword, Soglia is not contented to claim for the Church in her own hand what the bull Unam Sanctam claims ; that is, the spiritual sword. He does of course claim that, but he further claims that the same hand should have and hold also the corporal instruments " of lighter punishments," such as imprisonment, flogging, and beating with sticks— anything " short of effusion of blood." The last penalty is the stroke of the corporal sword, and is left to the temporal arm. The Church did not in past time claim two swords in her own hand, the spiritual one and the corporal. She only claimed a spiritual sword according to Boniface VIII ; NEWMAN'S LETTER ON THE SYLLABUS 127 and according to Dr. Newman she claims also a cat, a cudgel, and a rack.Neither in what he writes, nor in what he quotes, on this subject does Dr. Newman allow even an allusion to appear to the question whether the corporal sword is or is not in the power of the Church. He cannot be unaware that untrained Englishmen, in reading the statement of his authority to the effect that the corporal sword is by some writers withdrawn from the Church, would suppose that they taught that it is not in her power. Dr. Newman knows that such an impression upon their minds would be a false one. He knows that Cardinal Soglia does not give any hint that the cor poral sword is a weapon which the Church may not employ. Dr. Newman himself does not give any such hint. To ordinary readers, indeed, he seems to resent the assertion that she may employ it ; but even in seeming to resent it he does not venture to affirm that she may not do so. Much less does he say, in plain English, that such is the received doctrine. He engages us in chat about flogging and thrashing, and forgets all about where his Church keeps her corporal sword — the only one we care about. Not that we like even the instruments of flogging and thrashing, much less the instruments of other corporal pains which fall short of the " effusion of blood." Dr. Newman, at one time, says that the Syllabus does not address us in its separate portions ; and at another, shows that every one of its portions refers to an original document, in which that portion is to be found. These documents, he admits, are authoritative ; but the Syllabus, which culls out the really authoritative parts of them, is not authoritative. We can hardly credit Dr. Newman with making a distinction of the following sort : that one is to feel bound by the Pope's judgments when they lie buried in a clumsy document, and not feel bound by them when they have been culled out by himself, and put simply before us. If Dr. Newman feels free to teach in opposition to any one of the eighty sentences as read from the Syllabus, though bound to teach according to it when read in the original document, what he has written on the subject may have some kind of serious meaning for himself, though incom prehensible to other people. One other point we would notice. " When we turn to these documents which are authoritative," says Dr. Newman, " we find the SyUabus cannot even be called an echo of the apostolic voice." We certainly do not profess to find that it is so. It is an echo of a voice very unlike an apostolic one.- But Dr. Newman means the Pope's voice. Of that voice the words in the Syliabus are not an 128 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE echo, because they are its own words. Dr. Newman says that, as uttered in the Syllabus, they are not an exact reproduction of the words of the Pope ; meaning by that, as found in the original documents. The words in the Syllabus are the exact words of the Pope used on a second occasion, and sometimes slightly varied from those he originally did use. Dr. Newman has a passage in his own history which is not to be forgotten, and which ought to have made it difficult for him to stand on points about a variation of language made by a Pope, objecting that it impairs the authority of solemn documents. There was a moment in the life of Dr. Newman when he still retained the freedom of a Christian man to teach the Catholic faith, ancient, strong and true. But he was on the point of parting with it — in the very act of swearing away that blessed birthright of his soul. He had already recited the form of sound words caUed the Nicene Creed, and had come to the point where the plunge must be made from the rock of Scripture, on which it builds, into the quick sands of tradition. In the modern form of oath which, at that dark moment, he was venturing to take upon his conscience, the first sentences, after parting from the language of the Cathohc Church, the first that are the work of Rome, shift to another foundation from that laid under the old, scriptural, abiding verities. The true and noble old words, " the life of the world to come," built on the living Rock, are immediately succeeded by such preparation for modern inventions as the following : "I most firmly admit and embrace the apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions, and the other practices and statutes of the said Church. I do also admit the Holy Scripture according to that sense which holy Mother Church has held and does hold, to whom it belongs to judge as to the true sense and interpretation of the Holy Scripture ; nor shall I ever receive or interpret it except according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers." This new thing in a creed was said by the Pope to have been ordained by the Council of Trent. If Dr. Newman had taken the trouble to see how far the terms to which he had to swear were an " echo " of those of the Council, he would have found that there was a discrepancy, considerable in words, but, in practice, mon strous. The Council decreed that no one should interpret Holy Scripture against the unanimous consent of the Fathers. That decree was confirmed by the Pope. It had thus acquired all the warrant of infaUibUity, and the most solemn guarantee for being irreformable that Rome had it in her power to give. This decree was " of faith." How long did it continue to be " of faith " ? NEWMAN ON THE SYLLABUS 129 Only until the Pope prepared his Bull, coUecting the dogmatic decrees into a novel creed. Then it was altered. The men who, henceforth, were to be the priests of Rome found themselves called upon to take oath, not as the Council willed it and worded it, that they would never interpret Holy Scripture against the unanimous consent of the Fathers, but that they would never interpret it except according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers. This was another will and another wording altogether. The latter amounts to little less than an oath that they would never interpret it at all, except on very few points. To make the scope of this alteration clearer, let us suppose the case of Dr. Newman himself, while yet in the enjoyment of that ministry of the English Church which he afterwards threw away. Had he then been required not to preach anything contrary to the unanimous opinion of the bench of bishops, he might have felt tolerably free. But had he been required never to preach anything except according to the unanimous opinion of the bench of bishops, he would have felt — Why, I can hardly preach at all. Yet this vast change is made in a creed while its articles are passing through the process of being culled from the original documents, and presented in a coUected form. In this form it was imposed by oath upon the consciences of men for ever. One and the same Papal hand signed its infaUible certainty and irreformable permanency in one shape, in a little time afterwards altered its tenor, destroyed its certainty, reformed its scope, and then signed its infaUibUity and its irre formable permanency in the new shape. And an Englishman who swallows this camel in the creed stands between us and the light, straining out a gnat that he says has got into the SyUabus. But what is the real teaching, as to the use of physical force, of Cardinal Soglia, who is soberly put forward by Dr. Newman before the Enghsh public as justifying him in crying out against Mr. Glad stone for accusing the Church of claiming the right to use force ? Page 216 : " The Church, exercising her power in the external tribunal, has been long accustomed to chastise offenders even with prison, exUe, confinement in monasteries, whipping or flagellation, with fine, and other similar penalties ; which, inasmuch as they affect the body, are commonly called corporeal." Page 219 : " We affirm that in the inherent authority of the Church, by which she can coerce offenders with salutary penalties, is certainly contained the right of awarding such temporal penalties as consist in fine, exfle, prison, whipping, and other things of the same kind." Page 222 : " If a case occurs in which severer punishment appears necessary, the ecclesiastical judge may not himself resort to it, vol. 1. 9 130 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE but he is to hand over the delinquent to the secular power to be punished according to its will. Besides, it is evident that the crime of heresy itself was brought under the cognizance of the ecclesiastical tribunals up to the point when the heretics, being convicted, and found obstinate, were first punished by ecclesiastical censures, and afterwards, being subjected by the lay power to capital penalty, were exterminated." Page 222 : " The Church never pronounced a sentence of blood. Even the Inquisition smote heretics with the spiritual sword, and prison, but the lay princes subjected them to the last capital penalty." Page 217 : " Perhingius believes that the Church does possess the right of inflicting capital punish ment, but that she is not accustomed to exercise it, or to carry it out by ecclesiastical ministers and judges, but through lay ones, and by means of the temporal power, because the latter is more becoming, and more appropriate to the claims of the Church." What follows would, by internal evidence, seem to be added by Vecchiotti, but no intimation is given to that effect. Page 217 : " He [Cardinal Tarquini] held that there is no kind of penalty with which the Church may not in her own right punish offenders ; and thus temporal goods, reputation, rights of office and of heritage, and life itself, are subject to the ecclesiastical power. Otherwise the Church could not compel disobedient rebels, or avenge herself for their crimes, nor could she cut off rotten and noxious members from the body." Soglia, or rather his continuator, speaking of the moderns, Tarquini and " other doctors," and their doctrine of physical force, says (p. 217), " They derive it from the character and constitution of the Church herself, or from the nature of a per fect society and its end. Hence, just as in a perfect civil society the right of execution jus necis belongs to the lay power for the good of the commonwealth and of the citizens, so do they assert that none can deny that by stronger reason the same right resides in the ecclesiastical power foi the spiritual good of the faithful." CHAPTER II Six Secret Commissions preparing — Interrupted by Garibaldi — A Code for the Relations of the Church and Civil Society — Special Sitting with Pope and Antonelli to decide on the Case of Princes — Tales of the Crusaders — English Martyrs — Children on the Altar — Autumn of 1867 to June 1868 WHILE in the provinces the bishops were kindling enthu siasm for the coming assembly, and for the movement of reconstruction in general, in Rome six Commissions were at work, under the Directing Congregation, making secret pre parations for the Council. Each of these Commissions had of course a Cardinal at its head. The first, that for Theology, was under Cardinal Bilio, a monk, and a native of Piedmont, only forty years of age, and but lately raised to the purple.1 Rightly or wrongly, as Vitelleschi says, he is credited with the principal share in the preparation of the SyUabus. Others, however, are named for the same honour. We ourselves heard a member of the original Congregation for the preparation of the Syllabus assert that it was Passaglia who first suggested it. Passaglia was a great Jesuit theologian, who lost position by declaring against the temporal power. The second Commission, for Ecclesiastico-Political Affairs, was under Cardinal Reisach, a man of sixty-five, an accomplished Bavarian, but so denationalized in manner and spirit, that his countrymen sometimes accused him of affecting to have almost forgotten German. For some years he left Rome to hold high place in his native country. As Archbishop of Munich he did much to supplant the old national faith by the Vatican one, and to unsettle the previously existing relations of Church and State. Under his eye the popular catechism of Canisius was changed. The answer, "The Pope by himself is not 1 Cecconi, p. 62. 181 132 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE infaUible," had done good service for centuries ; but now it had to make way for a new one ; and eventuaUy the whole book was transformed by the French Jesuit Deharbe.1 The Commission next in importance was that on Ceremonies. If the theological one had to formulate the principles on which the world was to be governed, and the ecclesiastico-political one had to draft the rules and frame the executive machinery by which those principles were to be carried out, the Commission on ceremonies had to devise the scenic effects with which the movement should, to use a frequent expression of Roman, French, and even of German Catholic writers, be put upon the stage — the mise en scene. Oriental Affairs, the Religious Orders, and Ecclesiastical Discipline, were the subjects committed to the other three Commissions. A seventh, of which the official history makes no mention, was, according to Vitelleschi (p. 26), an object of great public attention. It was for Biblical matters, and the revision of the Index. Its President was Cardinal de Luca. But it inclined to a more liberal procedure in regard to the Index, gave offence, and after a few meetings, was discontinued. The official organs, as the same author says, buried it in oblivion, though its labours were of great public interest. The renewed preparations had not proceeded long before they were once more interrupted by political events. From August to December the Directing Congregation could hold no meeting. General Dumont had been sent back to Rome, by Napoleon III, to inspect and harangue those French soldiers who now formed a principal part of the so-caUed Pontifical, or (Ecumenical army. The national Italian party was excited by his presence and his speech. France forced them to feel that foreign occupation was discontinued only in name. Garibaldi, supported only by feeble forces, moved upon Rome with the reckless valour which had succeeded in Sicily. The 1 An interesting account of this change is given in Sepp's stirring speech in the Bavarian Parliament on the Mering case, Deutschland und der Vatican, pp. 182-85. ADVANCE OF GARIBALDI 133 movements of the Italian Government to restrain him were altogether inefficacious. The efficiency and zeal of the little army of " Crusaders " had been utterly underrated by the Italians. The Dutch, English, Swiss, German, and French youths who fought for the Crown of martyrdom were a dif ferent material from the soldiers of Ferdinand or from those of the old Papal corps. They faced great odds, and did right daring deeds. But they were too few. The ready French were once more called in. On November 3 they secured for Pius IX another respite by the battle of Mentana ; but the Pope's own historian does not even name the French. For all that is said by Cecconi, not a foreign mercenary might have been in the Pontiff's pay, not a foreign regiment might have been sent to his relief. Indeed the word " foreigner," as applied to any baptized person bearing arms for the Pontiff, is offensive language — another fruit of this degenerate age. In opposition to certain "ill-advised" Catholics, who thought it a pity to have recourse to foreign arms, the Civiltd cries : " Foreigners ? — the word is a great and odious lie ! At Solferino the French were foreigners ; at Mentana they were in their father's house." x So does the one belief that the Pope is the appointed lord of the world change the lights that faU on every national movement. We only saw the fact that at Solferino the French killed Teuton invaders of Italy, and that at Mentana they were the invaders who killed Italians. We shall find French mothers of " martyred " counts calling him for whom they fell, " our King." When the lance of Garibaldi was thus, for the second time, shivered against the shield of France, who would have said that when next lifted it would be in her defence, after the armies that had for twenty years upheld the temporal power had gone into captivity ? The martial value of the religious motives and principles which animated the Crusaders, as contrasted with the Garibal- dians, became a favourite theme for sacred pens. The Cru saders showed by their bearing that they were " conscious 1 VII. iii. 559- 134 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE of serving the majesty of the God of battles." They lost no passing opportunity of renewing their strength at the altar. The proud lads, in full equipment of war, bowed the knee before the altar, offered up their lives to God, and consecrated their bayonets to St. Peter ; or hastily receiving the Sacrament, they arose with joy and seized their pieces, which had been laid down by the raUs of the sacred table. Happy he who with his eyes beheld such elevation of thought, such constancy of purpose, such sanctity of Christian war march triumphantly through the Roman territory.1 On October 8, the correspondent of the Times at Berlin stated that Napoleon III had bound himself to leave Victor Emmanuel free as to Rome, provided the latter would help him in case of war with Prussia. Earlier than this, in the month of September, the Austrian bishops found themselves menaced with an abolition of the Concordat, and had to make a formal appeal to the Emperor against such a step. " We have at this time of day," said Baron Weichs, " to decide whether we shall be an independent State, or whether, as in Japan, we shall have two sovereigns ; the one, subordinate, residing at the Burg in Vienna ; the other, the omnipotent Master, having his throne in Rome, at the Vatican, or, more properly speaking, at the Jesuit establishment." The Revue des deux Mondes had spoken of these words as wise, even as very wise, and the Civiltd replied, " To us they seem to be nothing but buffoonery." ~ In November, Napoleon III proposed that the European Powers should meet in a Congress, to decide upon some solution of the Roman question. After this proposal had faUed, his Minister, M. Rouher, pronounced, in the Assembly, his cele brated " Never ! " — the French would never permit Rome to be occupied by the Italians. This exclamation is often printed by the " good Press " in the largest capitals. A fortnight after the day of Mentana the activity of the Commissions was resumed, and invitations were sent out to the theologians already selected in different countries, to come to Rome and enter on their labours. The Nuncio at Munich had 1 Civiltd, VII. x. 161. 2 serie VH. vol. vii. p. 22. BISHOPS IN PARTIBUS 135 not recommended any one from the renowned faculty of that city, but had sought his men at Wurzburg. England was represented by Monsignor Weathers, and the United States by Monsignor Corcoran. On October 2, Cardinal Caterini wrote to Bishop UUathorne of Birmingham, instructing him, in the Pope's name, to invite "the priest John Newman." Three weeks later the bishop replied, enclosing Dr. Newman's answer, which, however, is not printed. According to the bishop, Dr. Newman said that a journey to Rome would be perilous to his life, and though deeply touched with the kind ness of the Holy Father, he believed that the latter would not desire him to come at the risk of his life, especially as nothing would be advanced by his presence in an august solemnity of such moment, unskiUed as he was in matters of the sort.1 The language of Dr. Newman, as reported in this corre spondence, shows that he had but faint light on the part which mere divines were to play in the Council. Probably he was misled by history into supposing that their part would be public and considerable. His place, had he gone, would have been upon an unseen commission ; his share probably any thing but an important one ; and, as likely as not, his opinion might have been asked only in writing, and upon a question of Oriental affairs, instead of upon theology, as was that of his famous feUow oratorian Theiner. Of the very few German scholars invited to Rome who were not of the Jesuit school, one was Haneberg, who, according to Michelis, was so little consulted that he was soon back in Munich, to avoid idling away his time. In March the Pope intimated his intention of issuing in June the Bull of Convocation ; and then the purpled had to consider who should be summoned. The most serious doubt arose as to those useful fictions called bishops in partibus. They have much of what goes to make a bishop — the orders, robes, title, and consequence, everything but the office. Their want of this is delicately expressed by Cecconi — they have no determinate flock ; which in lay language means no flock at 1 Cecconi, pp. 370, 371. 1 36 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE all. The number of these Court followers have been so in creased that Sepp illustrates the case by that of a government creating a batch of peers to carry some measure. But such peers do not depend for their living on the men who want their votes. Even the Cardinals had not the courage to assert that creatures like these had a right to sit in the Council. They did raise the question of right, and left it formally unanswered ; but their next question was, Is it expedient to invite them ? They boldly affirmed that it was expedient. In May 1868, it was decided that the only proceeding to be observed with respect to Catholic princes was that of com municating a copy of the Bull of Convocation to each Court. But should the princes be invited to attend ? This question " was much debated among the purpled consulters, and was negatived." 1 The decision thus taken was logical, for no one is a Catholic prince " as such " who does not place the law of his land under canon law ; or, in proper language, who does not main tain " harmonious laws," recognizing politics as lying in the domain of morals, and therefore as being under the spiritual authority. When the controversy on the SyUabus began, the Civiltd had enjoyed a triumphant laugh at M. Langlais, a distinguished French advocate. M. Langlais had argued that the Encyclical would not have transgressed its proper boundary had it treated only of faith and morals, but that having touched the foundations of political institutions, it had transgressed that boundary. The Civiltd cried — There exist then, according to M. Langlais, foundations of political institutions outside of the circle of morals ! outside, conse quently, of the circle of manners ; or maybe, outside of the circle of human actions. . . . His argument assumes that the political order cannot be at the same time moral, or at least founded in the moral order, and assumes further that it must be separate from it, else he could not say that the Pope, simply by entering upon the political order, had gone out of the moral order (VI. i. 652-53). 1 Cecconi, p. 122. ARE KINGS TO BE INVITED? 137 It is not said that AntoneUi in particular took alarm. But it is said that fears arose lest the " novelty " resolved upon should prove perilous ; therefore the subject had to be recon sidered in the presence of the Secretary of State. The danger that might follow the brusque exclusion of princes was so felt that the former decision was on the point of being reversed. This shows Antonelli's ascendant. But his colleagues had a resource. Only six days before the date fixed for publishing the Bull, a special summons, not from GianneUi, but from AntoneUi himself, called together the Commission at a quarter past eight o'clock in the evening, to a meeting to be held " in presence of the Most Holy " (coram sanctissimo) — i.e. before the Pope.1 Before the Most Holy ! Thus are we placed in presence of the Eleven, and the kings are on their trial. The Nine are joined by the two men so dissimilar and so indissoluble, Pius IX and AntoneUi, in whom, as an official biographer puts it, he early discerned " the man of God," appointed as his succour and stay in his divine office. At the head of the Eleven sits the portly, good-looking Pope, the beau-ideal of an important squire in a remote place — full of will, spirit, and self-confidence, with more art in governing than he has got credit for, at least in that domineering and deluding which avails with priests. He would be as hilarious as a squire who never put to death anything more precious than a pheasant, and never cursed even a gamekeeper with any intention that his curse should be bound in heaven. Pius IX would now feel aU the weight of his office. He was sitting as supreme Judge, to decide upon the claims of the kings of the earth. Were they worthy or were they not worthy to be received into the Council which was to lay " the corner-stone of reconstruction," the Council in which the prerogatives rightfuUy claimed by his predecessors of blessed memory, but from which the Church, slow of heart to beheve, had hitherto withheld her former sanction, were at last to be openly acknowledged in his person ? 1 Cecconi, p. 382. 138 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE No one could doubt what view Pius IX would take. The kings were clearly guilty. They had consented to the voice of their people against the voice of the Church. They had abolished harmonious laws. The internal tribunal was reduced to a voluntary confessional ; the external tribunal, in most places, was removed, and everywhere subordinated. Even as to the Supreme Tribunal, who hearkened to the words, " Know that thou art the Father of princes and of kings, and the Governor of the world ? " When the call for Trent went forth, the only doubtful crowns were two lying away between civilization and Cim merian night in England and Sweden. Now on every hand the word was, There are no Catholic princes. That old English crown was now represented by two monsters of power, the British Empire and the United States. Two other mon sters had come up, Prussia and Russia. Spain was faUen, Poland was extinct, Italy was hostile, Austria was enfeebled, France was strong but not sound — there were no Catholic States. The social system was indeed in ruins. It was only by clearing away that the foundations for reconstruction could be properly laid ; but clearing away was attended with danger. The princes were not to be invited, but they were to be allowed to claim admission. The BuU was then and there altered in this sense.^j i Meanwhile symptoms of the coming conflict began to appear. Catholics of aU classes looked forward to great events for the Church and the nations. Those who did not share the hopes of the hidden Council, or who recoUed from the dogmas likely to be decreed, felt anxious. The Press began to pour out pamphlets and reprints, enabling aU to read up on the question of CouncUs. "The Crusaders of St. Peter " was the title of historical tales now regularly appearing in the Civiltd, which continued for years. The object was to make the blood of Mentana the seed of a great oecumenical army. Every incident was described with vivid conception and boundless faith in the destiny of the 1 Cecconi, pp. 121-24. BLESSEDNESS OF THE CRUSADERS 139 Papacy, with faith too in the duty of all to rear up sons for the Crusade, and faith that those who fell escaped purgatorial pains and found direct entrance among the beatified. The following are passages scattered here and there — It was a sight to rejoice the angels in heaven, that of these brave men laying down the carabine to perform the little office of the Virgin, and then turning from the little office of the Virgin to take up the carabine. ... On the march fatigue was lightened by reciting the prayer which had so often conquered the foes of the Church, the rosary. . . . The masters of war know that on the field of battle the last army to deserve ridicule is an army fresh from confession and communion. ... A young gentlewoman gave birth to her first-born. " How long it will be," she said, " ere he can carry a musket ! But Pius IX can do anything. He can make a zouave even now of my Eugenio." Melted by such faith, the Pope wrote a benediction on a paper " consecrated to him " bythe infant. The venerated word was placed in the domestic sanctum, and in return for it " the zouave at the breast will do a soldier's service." Some weeks later, on receiving from him a first oblation, the Pope again wrote a word for "his soldier in swaddling clothes." The family were overjoyed at being permitted within five months to kiss two Papal autographs. The mother wrote, " Eugenio was asleep. I ran to put the Papal benediction on his head and forehead. He immediately broke out in a smile, and to me he looked like an angel. I could not restrain my tears. He still slept, but bounded for joy as long as I kept the blessed letters on his little head. . . . Should the avengers of Mentana try their hand, the zouave will lisp his first word crying Viva Maria ! " Arthur Guillemin said to his crusaders as he led them to the attack at Monte Libretti, fresh from absolution, " You are aU in the grace of God ; do not count them, they will fall into our hands." They marched into battle, some with the rosary round their neck, some with the Carmelite scapular on their breast, and some with the cord of St. Francis round the loins, just like that model of a crusader St. Louis. The young Count de Quelen, who fell heroically at Monte Libretti, had just received a letter from his mother. " If thou art to die, my good Urban, die like a hero, like a soldier of God." After his death she writes to a friend in Rome — My beloved son is dead — died for his God. Oh what a comfort 140 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE is that thought amid this desolation ! He fell like the brave, defending the Church and our venerated Pontiff. Was it not a signal favour granted to him by that Lord who is so good that He put it into his heart to shed every drop of his blood for Him, and by this very means to bring him to paradise, where Urban henceforth — yes, I dare believe it— enjoys the vision of his God, and is beatified for all eternity, with beatitude unmixed ? " [Thus it was plain that having fallen in battle he had, as the writer of the story says, " seized the palm of martyrdom, as he, following St. Louis, called it," and so had escaped the pains of purgatory.] " If," continues the mother to her friend, " you go to a reception of our holy and venerated Pontiff and King, assure him, I pray you, that I am happy that my son has shed his blood for him." When the body arrived at Quimper, two hundred priests and a crowd uncounted from the surrounding Breton villages came, " rather to venerate than to pray for the departed." The houses were draped in black, the black was decked with the French and the Papal flags ; on the coffin lay his sword, twined with laurels and crowned with vermilion. The bishop pro nounced the panegyric " magnifying him as a martyr for religion." Mrs. Stone, a volunteer sister of charity, went from Rome to Nerola to visit the wounded prisoners in the hands of the Garibaldians, and especially Alfred Collingridge. The dying crusader said, " The Lord has given me the favour I asked — to die for the Holy Father. Oh, yes, may God accept of my death and my blood for the triumph of Holy Church and for the conversion of England ! " He com plained that his rosary had been taken away, and Mrs. Stone supplied him with her own. Alfred Collingridge, from Oxford, " was the first of the English who laid down his life in the Crusade of St. Peter." The writer prays, " May this first English blood shed on Roman soil rise up before God, and descend again in a dew of mercy on the land of Britain ! " Of Alfred's countrymen were present, his own brother George, two Watts-Russells, David Shee, and Oswald Cary, "all soldiers of St. Peter " (VII. v. 155 ff.). The father hearing from George of the death of Alfred, had only one regret, that he could not himself step into his vacant place, THE MARTYRED CRUSADERS 141 When Arthur GuiUemin fell he was unhappily consigned to a grave in common with Garibaldians ; because it " was not then possible to separate in the grave the friends of God from His enemies." Six months later, Fathers Wilde and Gerlache, with others, piously sought the body of the martyr to restore it to his native Aire-sur-la-Lys, by express desire of Pius IX Canon Druot had come to Rome to claim it in the name of the family, the country, and the Church of GuiUemin's birth. The seekers of the relic included an O'Reilly, a Le Dieu, a Bach, a Loonen, and a Mimmi. " You will find him," said a peasant, " with a Garibaldian at his feet." The first object recognized was a Carmelite scapular. " It is like mine," cried an officer ; " two both alike were given to him and me by the Countess Macchi ! " Soon was seen the end of the cord of St. Francis, worn by the deceased in imitation of St. Louis of France. As the corpse was borne off to Rome, the people pressed around and cried Evviva ! — Long life to him ! This cry " strange around a bier," expressed a " profound sense of the marveUous," and threw " a glittering light upon the idea formed by Christians of those who fall fighting in the modern crusade." At Rome, in the great Church of St. Louis of France, the bier was surrounded by ambassadors, prelates, and officers, including the Minister of War. At home, the " precious deposit " was received in an iUuminated chapel, decorated, not with symbols of death, but of glory. " The crowd of pilgrims from the whole of northern France" thronged the town. The bier was adorned with symbols of victory, the work of Roman artists. The coffin was borne by the youth of the town, emulous by changes to come under the coveted burden. A party of pontifical zouaves in uniform attended. From the corners of the hearse rose trophies of the pontifical flag "garlanded with triumphal laurel." While yet the corpse lay in the iUuminated chapel, a new-born nephew of Arthur was borne in by the mother, who " piously laid him upon the coffin, as used the ancient Christians to lay their little ones on the sepulchres of the martyrs. A thriU of reverence went through the assembly." During the funeral 142 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE procession, the eyes of the multitude " were fixed with devout curiosity on a piece of his uniform spread out upon the bier, in which was seen the rent made by the wound " (VII. iv. 415). Aire-sur-la-Lys is not very far from our own shores, beyond Calais. CHAPTER III Bull of Convocation — Doctrine of the Sword — The Crusade of St. Peter — Incidents — Mission to the Orientals, and Overtures to Protestants in different Countries — June 1868 to December 1868-69. IT was on St. Peter's Day, June 29, 1868, that the Bull of Convocation was issued. According to the Pope's promise, the CouncU was to meet on the Feast of the Im maculate Conception, December 8, 1869. The language of the BuU was diplomatically vague as to the objects of the assembly, but awfully explicit as to the authority by which it was convened. Not in an obiter dictum, but in legislative language jointed to bear the strain of ages, a claim is set up, as Sepp points out, to exercise the authority of the whole Trinity, and, indeed, we may add, whatever further authority Peter and Paul can lend. " Confiding in and supported by the authority of Almighty God Himself, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and of His blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, which we also exercise upon earth." 1 It ought to be remembered that M. Veuillot writes down the date of this Bull as the day on which the middle ages died. The in dication of objects, though vague to us, sufficed for the initiated. Ce qui se Passe au Concile says (p. 9) — The Pope repeatedly intimates that the Church has the right " to redress the errors which turn civil society upside down, ... to preserve the nations from bad books and pernicious journals, and from those teachers of iniquity and error to whom the unhappy youth are confided whose education is withdrawn from the clergy ; ... to defend justice, ... to assure the progress and solidity of the human sciences." This somewhat confounds things spiritual and temporal ; but those political allusions drowned in the usual digressions of Pontifical documents, passed unobserved. 1 Acta, p. 6. 113 144 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE If they passed unobserved in Roman Catholic countries, where journalists did know a little of the modes of pontifical speech, how much more in countries like England and America, where at that time it was considered uninteUigent to speak or write upon the subject from knowledge, the proper thing being a serene superiority to study, and a judicious expression of opinions caught in the air. To obviate the objection that the assembly would be only a synod of the Western Church, and not an (Ecumenical Council, the Bull was foUowed by Letters Apostolic addressed to aU prelates of the Oriental Churches not holding communion with Rome.1 Until the Vatican Council these were regarded only as schismatics, not as heretics. Therefore the Pope invited them to come, and by submitting to the See of Rome to com plete the union. This invitation was dated September 8 ; and on the 13th of that month a " paternal letter " went forth, to Protestants and other non-Catholics. AU these, from Anglican Ritualists down to the smaUest sects, were grouped together, not being caUed to take any part in the CouncU, but to seize the occasion of joining the Pope's Church by renouncing then- heresies and submitting to his authority. Although the approach of the Council excited little attention in Protestant countries, it began to be discussed in Roman Catholic ones with an interest which rapidly warmed to excite ment. The tremendous significance attached by Ultramontane authorities to the BuU, especiaUy to the non-invitation of princes, and to the coming struggle with the Modern State, was enough to rouse Catholics who did not sympathize with the aims indicated. The Civiltd put the alternative as be tween the end of the world or its salvation by the CouncU. " Either, in the inscrutable designs of God, human society is destined to perish, and we are close upon the supreme cataclysm of the last day, or the salvation of the world is to be looked for from the CouncU and from nothing else." 2 Language like this 1 Archbishop Manning gave reasons for looking upon the motive here assigned as " a transparent error." 2 Serie VII. vol iii. p. 264. THE HEAD OF OUR WHOLE SPECIES 145 is not to be smfled at when it goes to the heart of perhaps half a million of ecclesiastics, each one of whom transmits the im pression through a wide circle. The foUowing passage in the same article may be laid to heart. A good part of it is quoted by Janus, with the remark that it needs but a step further to declare the Pontiff an incarnation of God. The Pope is not a power among men to be venerated like another. But he is a power altogether divine. He is the propounder and teacher of the law of the Lord in the whole universe ; he is the supreme leader of the nations to guide them in the way of eternal salvation ; he is the common father and universal guardian of the whole human species in the name of God. . . . The treasures of revelation, the treasures of truth, the treasures of righteousness, the treasures of supernatural graces upon earth, have been deposited by God in the hands of one man, who is the sole dispenser and keeper of them. The life-giving work of the divine incarnation, work of wisdom, of love, of mercy, is ceaselessly continued in the ceaseless action of one man, thereto ordained by Providence. This man is the Pope. This is evidently implied in his designation itself — The Vicar of Christ. For if he holds the place of Christ upon earth, that means that he continues the work of Christ in the world, and is in respect of us what Christ would be were He here below, Himself visibly governing the Church. ... It is, then, no wonder if the Pope, in his language, shows that the care of the whole world is his, and if, forgetting his own perU, he thinks only of that of the faithful nations. He sees aberrations of mind, passions of the heart, overflowing vices ; he sees new wants, new aspirations ; and holding out to the nations a helping hand, with the tranquillity of one securely seated on the throne given him by God, he says to them, Draw nigh to me, and I wfll trace out for you the way of truth and charity which alone can lead to the desired happiness.1 Such divines as held that the proper work of a General Council was to heal schisms or combat heresies, remarked on the absence of both. Such as were unwilling to see the Church straining after temporal power, and placing herself in anta gonism to freedom and light, could ill conceal their anxiety. But the Jesuits everywhere hailed the dawning of a wonder ful day. 1 Serie VII. vol. iii. pp. 259, 260. VOL. I. I0 146 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE On Saturday, October 17, 1868, the Abbe Testa, accom panied by three other priests, went to the palace of the Patri arch of Constantinople, bearing the Pope's letter to the Oriental bishops. The Vicar-General received the four Latin priests, and introduced them to his Holiness the Patriarch, whose hand they kissed. The Patriarch, on his part, embraced them, and expressed his pleasure at seeing them. The Abbe Testa then drew a richly adorned little book from his pocket and offered it to the Patriarch, while one of his brethren told his Holiness, in Greek, that they had come to invite him to attend the (Ecumenical Council, and begged him to receive the letter of invitation. His Holiness motioned to the Abbe Testa to lay the little book down near him, and said, " Had not the Giornale di Roma published the letter whereby his Holiness summons us to Rome to a Council, which he calls oecumenical, and had we not thus learned the object and contents of the letter, and also the principles of his Holiness, we should have received a communication from the Patriarch of old Rome with the utmost pleasure, in hope of finding some change in his mode of thinking. As, however, this invitation is in the journals, and as his Holiness has proclaimed views in direct opposition to the principles of the orthodox Churches of the East, we declare to you, Reverend Fathers, with grief and at the same time with sincerity, that we cannot receive either such an invitation or such a letter, which only assert principles opposed to the spirit of the Gospel and to the declarations of the (Ecu menical Councils and of the Holy Fathers." The Patriarch proceeded to refer to the Pope's former advances, and delicately hinted that when they had objected that he held principles which were to be regretted, his reply showed that he was so much pained that it was better not to put him to grief a second time. " In short, we look for the true settlement of the question to history. Ten centuries ago there was one Church, confessing the same faith in East and West, in old Rome and new Rome. Let us go back for that period, and let us see who has added and taken away. THE PATRIARCH OF CONSTANTINOPLE 147 Let us suppress innovations, if such there are, and then shall we imperceptibly find ourselves at that point of Catholic orthodoxy from which Rome was pleased gradually to diverge in the earlier centuries, ever widening the gulf of separation more and more by new dogmas and definitions which depart from the holy traditions." The Abbe Testa asked what principles his Holiness spoke of. " Without entering into minute points," replied the Patri arch, " we can never admit that wherever the Church of our Saviour extends upon earth any Chief Bishop exists in the midst of her except our Lord, or that there is a Patriarch who is infallible whenever he speaks ex cathedrd, who is exalted above the Oecumenical Councils, to which alone infallibility attaches, seeing that they always held to holy scripture and apostolic tradition." The Abbe referred to the Council of Florence, and received a full and courteous answer. The Patriarch at last said, " If you would see that union realized which we all desire, place yourselves on the ground of history and of the General Councils ; or, if that is too hard upon you, let us all pray to God for peace to the world and prosperity and union to the Church. For the moment, we declare, with pain, that this invitation is fruitless and this circular of no effect." The four Latins urged that prayer alone did not suffice ; if one was sick we not only prayed but employed means of cure. " When the sickness is spiritual," replied the Patriarch, " the Lord alone knows who is the sick man, how he suffers, what is the root of the malady, and what the real cure. I say again there is urgent necessity for ceaseless prayer to the Lord of the whole earth, that He may guide all to conclusions well pleasing to God." The Patriarch then directed the Vicar-General to hand back the little book, and the four abbes took their leave, accom panied to the stair by the Vicar-General .*- Speaking of this interview, the Stimmen aus Maria Laach said, " Neither by his words nor his deeds did the Patriarch 1 Friedberg Aktenstuche, pp. 250-53, 148 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE manifest polish, theological science, or ecclesiastical educa tion." ** The invitation was rejected by the Metropolitan of Ephesus, and the Bishops of Varna and Thessalonica. The Metropolitan of Chalcedon wrote upon it Epistrephete—" Be converted "— and returned it. The Patriarch of Antioch sent the letter back, and his ten bishops did the same. So also the orthodox Greek Patriarch of Jerusalem and his bishops (Friedberg, p. 70). The Bishop of Thessalonica assigned four reasons, the last of which called forth a laboured reply from the Jesuits of Laach. " The Pope is a king," said the Oriental, " and wields the sword, which is contrary to the gospel." The reply was that the existence of the smaU but heroic army of the Pope was not due so much to any wUl of his as to the nature of his office as chief shepherd of the universal Church. The army and the temporal power, " without which this office cannot exist," were manifestly necessary. But then the " schismatical bishop " asks if bearing the sword is not contrary to the gospel. No ; for in the very words of the gospel Christ aUowed the apostles to bear two swords. Having reached this practical point in the teaching of Boniface VIII, the writer goes on to show that Peter was not told to cast his sword away, but only to put it up into the sheath ; which clearly meant that he was to bear it. If he was reproved for using it, that was because, though he had asked permission to do so, he had not yet received it ; for, in fact, at that point of time, the supreme power promised to Peter had not been actually bestowed upon him. But seeing that he was told to keep the sword, are we to suppose that when he did become ruler, he and his successors for all time were to keep it hanging at their sides, as a useless weight ? Certainly not ; " he beareth not the sword in vain." The writer would probably have called any one an infidel who expected a literal fulfUment of the words " all they that take the sword shaU perish with the sword." In reviewing the reception given in the East to the BuU, 1 Neue Folge, Erstes Heft, pp. 72, 73. CASE OF THE PROTESTANTS 149 consolation was drawn from the fact that the Armenian Patriarch in Constantinople had raised the brief to his fore head. But the Catholikos of the same Church in the See of Etschmiazin rejected it with decision. The iU-success of these overtures displeased the " good Press." Pius IX had been flattered into the belief that he had in great measure "restored" the ascendancy of the Pontiff over the East. Even Arch bishop Manning had said enough in print to show that he came back from Rome in 1867 with some such idea, and prelates of more experience had done the same. Representations as to the readiness of Protestants to submit, had led to the letter to Protestants. Bishop Martin of Pader born had strong hopes of those in Germany, and set store by some odd letters, said to be from Protestant clergymen, which, however, seem to be either spurious, or from men not likely to lead anybody.1 Archbishop Manning, after several sentences coloured by a pontifical imagination, had said, " The Council of Trent fixed the epoch after which Protestantism never spread. The next General Council wUl probably date the period of its dissolution." 2 Between the date of the Bull of Convocation and that of the invitation to the Orientals, the Pope performed two journeys to the Alban Hills, which were celebrated by Court journalists. At Rocca di Papa, where Hannibal is said to have pitched his tents, the little army of his Holiness was, after modern usage, encamped. The Pontiff went on purpose across the Campagna and up the hills, passed through the ranks of his defenders, and himself celebrated Mass for their benefit. When his next birthday was celebrated, the zouaves made a special display in the Piazza of St. Peter's, of which the Civiltd gives a long but lively description. The last formation mentioned is to us new in military evolutions. The zouaves " formed so as to make the letters composing the august name Pius IX." 3 Ever since i860 the preaching of " taking up the cross," of 1 These productions are published by Friedrich — Tagebuch, p. 453 ff. 2 The Centenary of St. Peter, and the General Council, p. 90. 3 Civiltd, Serie VII. vol. v. p. 234. 150 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE the glory of " dying for religion," and of the pure, bright martyrdom of falling on the field for St. Peter, had been rather heavy work. Now the gleam of victory at Mentana lighted up the future. Vistas long and luminous led the eye of the fighting sons of Loyola away to other scenes, where John VIII as Admiral, or John X as General, or Pius V rejoicing over Lepanto, with other martial glories of the Papacy, paled before what the Virgin and St. Michael were about to bring to pass. Loud and ringing sounded forth to the faithful the caU to the crusade of St. Peter. The youth of the Catholic world were assured that not the fall of Richmond nor the capture of Sebas- topol, not Solferino nor Sadowa, had moved human society as did the tidings from Mentana. Stories true and often very touching were mixed with fables and with ecstasies. The tales were those of youths from the noblest houses and from the lowliest cots. The young Duke de Blacas " dedicated his sword to the tomb of St. Peter, as his forefathers dedicated theirs to the tomb of Christ." In his death youths are to see the martyr palm for which it is noble to pant, and mothers are to see a privilege which they might well seek in prayer. Peter Jong, a poor Dutch lad, only son of his mother, a widow, who gave him up rejoicing as if God had granted her great grace, feU, it is said, after having slain fourteen Italians. He receives this tribute : " For St. Peter he inflicted many just deaths ; for St. Peter he worthily met his own." It is told how the King of Holland keeps Jong's photograph in his portfolio, and shows it to other intending crusaders as an encouragement. Another Dutch youth writes : " Mamma, blessed is he who sheds the last drop of his blood. The martyrs of all the centuries descend to meet him and to conduct him to heaven." This, though Protestants may not know it, is spiritual warfare ! for " to defend the Church of Christ is a spiritual object." One proof constantly aUeged that bayonet and baU used for St. Peter are to re-establish truth and righteousness is, " This is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith." The young Duke de Blacas, not having been in action, seemed in dying to think that he should not escape purgatory. Care, A MARTYR NOT IN BATTLE 151 however, is taken, in a studiously written biography of a Gol- doni who also died before battle, to show that in point of martyrdom, as to the old crusaders, no difference was made by St. Bernard and St. Catherine of Siena between those who died in battle and those who died in the service. Also, that no difference had been made between these two classes of the cru saders of St. Peter by Pius IX. He had comforted a father who regretted that his son had not faUen in battle, by teUing him that he had " the supreme " consolation, because the son had died in the service of the Holy See. And he had, in his solemn Allocution, compared both classes alike to the martyred Maccabees. The father of Goldoni, pictured as a devout and humane physician, is represented as often putting up the prayer for his only son, " Oh that God would inspire him to take up the cross ! " Young Goldoni was a diligent reader of the Unitd Cattolica and the Civiltd, from which " sources of religious and of pure intellectual culture he drew a generous and daring spirit." Though he died unhappily before battle, his biographer sees him seated among the celestial martyrs, between the Duke de Blacas and the Count Zileri de Verme, with whom do rejoice and glory others who died at a distance from the fight. When Goldoni received his " caU " to the crusade, he started in haste. " It seemed as if the Spirit of God carried him." The Archbishop of Modena specially blessed " our young crusader." He then received the Sacra ment, and so " heart to heart with Jesus Christ consecrated his life to Holy Church." Moreover, in parting, " the young cavalier of Jesus Christ put upon his bosom, as if a breastplate, an image of Mary." The night before leaving home he, " in the manner of the old crusaders," knelt at his father's knee and asked his blessing. WhUe the father " shed upon him the holy water and the prayer," Antonio burst into weeping. Arrived in Rome, Goldoni sought a Jesuit to " govern his soul." The Jesuit made aUusion to the dangers of his new life. " I have made up my mind to be a martyr for the Holy See," replied Goldoni. " The Holy Father has declared the temporal power necessary to the spiritual. Therefore, fighting and dying 152 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE for the temporal power, I should indirectly be a martyr for our holy religion." The Jesuit was overcome at hearing these generous sentiments from a youth so superior. Two days after, the Jesuit and Goldoni met " in the tribunal of penitence." Goldoni soon caught a fever, and in the hospital often con fessed. On the Feast of St. John Berchmans 1 he declared that he had obtained from the saint the grace to be with him in Paradise on the day of the Assumption of the Virgin. He reiterated that he should on the day of the Assumption go to heaven to see the Madonna and St. John Berchmans. His good father, caUed from Modena, arrived in time to bless and pray for his departing Antonio. At the last moment he left him, for it would seem that those around thought that the presence of the earthly father would come between him and the heavenly Father. So he lay, with his lustrous eyes fixed on heaven, as if, says the chaplain, " he was awaiting the appear ance of his John Berchmans, who was to present him at the throne of the great Virgin." At seven o'clock on the morning of the Assumption he passed away. 1 Technically, Berchmans seems to be only a beatified, not a saint. CHAPTER IV Princes, Ministers, and their Confessors — Montalembert's part in the Revival — His Posthumous Work on Spain — Indignation against the New Assumptions — Debate of Clergy in Paris on the Lawful ness of Absolving a Liberal Prince or Minister — Wrath at Rome — True Doctrines taught to Darboy and his Clergy. IN proportion as this Popery of physical force came into view, did the mental stress of Catholics who had put their faith in finer forces increase. Chateaubriand, who played a briUiant part in the Catholic reaction which foUowed the great French Revolution, especiaUy in that phase of the movement which aimed at linking together, in the imagination, Rome and ideas and hopes now dear to man kind, left a work, at his death, which he called Memoirs from Beyond the Grave — Memoires d'outre Tombe. Montalembert, who played a stiU more briUiant part in the Catholic reaction which foUowed the Revolution of 1830, also left behind him a work, to appear after his death. In that work we can trace the pains of a representative mind, showing what must have been those of multitudes at the time of which we now write. Montalembert saw, in " the absolutist politics, the retrospec tive fanaticism, the embittered hostility to aU modern ideas and institutions, flaunted everywhere by the religious press," 1 not only a blot on the cause, which had been his life-passion — a passion of feminine flame but of masculine vigour — but also a personal wound. It made his past look like a well-played hypocrisy. He had enthusiastically and victoriously argued for Catholicism under plea of liberty. " I neither can nor wiU," he cries, " keep sUence, as to the monstrous articles published this very year (1868) by the Civiltd Cattolica against liberty in 1 L'Espagne et la Liberie. Bibliotheque Universelle de Lausanne 1876, p. 626. 154 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE general, and precisely against those Liberal Catholics who, like me, have had the naivete in the Parliamentary tribune to assert the rights of the Jesuits, and cause them to triumph in the name of liberty." ** On the second anniversary of that mysterious Thursday in February 1848, when King Louis Philippe, of the Tuileries, suddenly changed into Mr. Smith in a street cab on the way to exile, Montalembert and Thiers pleaded in the National Assem bly for " freedom of instruction " on behalf of the Jesuits. " It was only," says our orator, " in the name of liberty, of modern constitutions, of modern liberty, of the liberty of conscience, of the Press, and of the tribune, that we made the claim." He adds that the victory was won only by Thiers brandishing the text of the Republican constitution in the face of the furious Mountain, a constitution proclaiming equal freedom of worship and association to aU. The italics are his own — We were all wrong, it is clear. In sound theology M. Renan alone was right — he and the like of him who maintained that Catholicism, and above all, the Jesuits, were absolutely incompatible with liberty. Only — we ought to have been told it then. It was then, and not now, that they ought to have taught us that liberty was a plague, instead of taking advantage of it, and that by our help, in order, twenty years later, to come insulting and repudiating both it and us, at one and the same time. I have long passed the age of disappointments and passionate emotions, but I declare on reading these bare-faced palinodes I have reddened to the white of my eyes, and shivered to the ends of my nails. I am no longer child enough to complain of the incon sistencies of men in general, or of Jesuits in particular, but I loudly say that this tone of the puppy and the pedant (ce ton de faquin et de pedagogue), employed towards old defenders, all of whom are not dead, and in respect of old struggles, which may be renewed to-morrow, does not become either monks or reputable men. It may be perfectly orthodox. In matters of theology I am no judge, but I think I am a judge in a matter of honour and decency ; and I declare it is perfectly indecent." We give but one more extract from this unconscious palinode of the high-souled Montalembert, who could not even then see 1 Ibid. p. 635. A CASE OF CONSCIENCE 155 that the Liberal Catholicism of his ideal was a generous phan tasy, irreconcilable with the Popery of Rome, as much so as was his beloved parliamentary system in politics with the Second Empire. No more could he see that Pope and Jesuit were true to themselves in urging their old and fixed principles, and had been equaUy true to themselves in using instruments like him so long as they struck or stayed their hand at " the beck of the priest," and in disowning them so soon as they set up to keep a conscience for themselves, " as if the rod should shake itself against them that lift it up." He and his friend Lacordaire carried to Rome the large ideas of a great people, and bathed the quaint figures of the Curia, and the quaint objects of the city, in the tropical light of their own genius, just as Lamartine had done with the withered remnants of the East. After such pictures as Montalembert had drawn in his books, and his speeches, of his ideal Catholic Church, it must have been mortifying to have, in age and sickness, to write as follows — " Certainly, a strange way has been invented of serving religion, of making the modern world accept, comprehend, and love it. One might say that they treat the Church like one of those wild beasts that are carried about in menageries. Look at her, they seem to say, and understand what she means, and what is her real nature ! To-day, she is in a cage, tamed and broken in, by force of circum stances. She can do no harm for the present ; but understand that she has paws and tusks, and if ever she is let loose you will be made to know it " (p. 641). As he wrote this sad passage, in aU probability there would rise before his imagination one of the most memorable scenes in the life of any orator. When glorifying the return of the Pope to Rome, restored by French force, and deprecating any attempt at a conflict with the Church, he said that from any such conflict only dishonour could result, as to a strong man would result dishonour from a combat with a woman. And then, turning upon his audience, he said, " The Church is more than a woman ; the Church is a mother," with a gush and a power which produced such a scene as perhaps has hardly ever 156 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE been witnessed in any parliamentary assembly. And both ideals were quite sincere. The Church of Montalembert's imagination was a mother ; the Church of the Civiltd Cattolica is a dam, holding to her young while they continue in sheer dependence, treating them as strangers when they can take care of themselves. His Church is the dream of an exceptional few, the Church of the Civiltd is the strong reality. The articles which called forth this protestation of Monta lembert, were among the most curious even of the Civiltd. They dealt with France — Paris and Darboy. On February 5, 1868, the Archbishop of Paris held a conference of his clergy in the Church of Saint Rocque, and there argued the foUowing case of conscience. By some exceptional feat of the worst of all evfl genii, Publicity, the discussion, and its result, were re ported in the Patrie ; and this indiscretion caused the world for once to gain a real peep into the consultations in the judges' chambers, behind the internal tribunal. " A man engaged in politics," says the case of conscience, " de clares to his confessor that he has no intention of renouncing the doctrines which prevail among modern nations, the principal points of which are, liberty of worship, liberty of the Press, and the action of the State in mixed affairs. The confessor asks if he is to grant absolution to a penitent in this state of mind, or to deny it." — Civiltd, VII. ii. 151. The reasoning ascribed to the supposed penitent is the following — You, as my confessor, have not the right to lay on me as you would on a private man, the duty of devoting a certain day, and of adopting certain means for the conversion of this or that person. Doubtless, I ought, by word and example, to lay myself out for the conversion and edification of my neighbour ; but it rests with me as a free agent to select the means and to discern the oppor tunity. In like manner, you cannot order me as politician, legis lator, or prince, to take, this very day, this or that measure, against blasphemy for example, or Sunday labour, or the licence of the Press. Lay it upon me to attend to the propagation of righteous ness and truth ; but leave it to me to judge of the opportunity, and to choose the means. And, I pray you, consider the grounds of my opinions. In the first place, whenever we speak or act, MAY A PRINCE BE ABSOLVED? 157 we have on one side the truth and right, which certainly ought to be respected ; but on the other side we have fitness and opportunity, of which also we must take account, if we would speak to good purpose. Now, in this respect, I know better than any other what I can do, and what I cannot, in my family, or in a political assembly, or in the nation. In the next place, perhaps you do not see the absurdity which would follow the opposite opinion. It would follow that you had the right to decide and regulate all my actions, because into every one of them morality may enter ; and every one of them may be connected with religion. You would be able to dictate my will, to teU me what vote I ought to give, to determine whether I am to declare peace or war. Mere trifles, you say. But what, in that case, would temporal power be, but a passive instrument of the spiritual power, and a mere machine ? These are the reasons why I stand to my old notions on this point, and have no thought of changing them for others. In this case, as thus put, and in the ensuing discussion, we see the confessor of a king or minister preparing to meet his " penitent." In the language of Montalembert, we see the feeling of a politician in facing the " tribunal," under an Ultra montane confessor ; and in the papers of the Civiltd we see the glaring eye of Rome searching out every movement of the one and the other. The case being thus stated, both as to its substance and as to the reasoning of the supposed penitent, the discussion began. Abbe Michaud, of the Madeleine, maintained that the confessor ought to grant absolution. Abbe G , a Dominican, main tained that he ought not to do so. Archbishop Darboy now and then interfered, to moderate the opposition of the latter. The Abbe Falcimagne interrupted the Archbishop, declaring that he would deny the absolution, for the supposed penitent was unworthy of it. FinaUy, the Abbe Hamon, Cure of Saint Sulpice, read out four conclusions, which were fully accepted by the Archbishop, and which allowed the confessor to grant the absolution. The Opinion Nationale and other j ournals said that this conclusion showed to how little the condemnations of the SyUabus amounted. Both the conclusion and the grounds on which it was rested gave huge offence at Rome. The Civiltd was not content with 158 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE less than five long articles, making ninety octavo pages. It is in these that the things are set forth which fired the embers of Montalembert's true love of liberty, and damped his dying hope of ever seeing his ideal Catholicism and actual Popery seated on the same throne. We need not quote the passages which are echoed in his indignant repudiation ; but we give a few others, which show that, strongly as we have seen him put the case, he was not guilty of any injustice. The Abbe Michaud said that the liberty condemned was not moderate liberty, but unbounded liberty.1 The Civiltd took it for granted that he could not have been sincere. " Similar to liberty of worship, is tha,t worst of hberties, never sufficiently execrated or abhorred — liberty of the Press, which some dare to invoke and promote with so much clamour." It continues — " In respect of religion and the Press, it is idle to distinguish between two sorts of liberty, one wise and the other unbridled, as the Abbe did. In such matters, aU liberty is a deli rium and a pestilence. There is no healthy man's delirium ; all delirium is that of a sick man. There is no praiseworthy and harmless plague ; every plague is deadly. . . . Hence, it is never a decent thing to introduce such liberty into a civil community. It is only permissible to tolerate it in certain cases, in the same way that a pest is tolerated " (p. 160). The Abbe Michaud had said that, in mixed questions, the State interfered by the same right as the Church ! Such an utterance savoured of our bad times. It was infected with the idea of the independence of the civU power in regard to the ecclesiastical. This idea was born with Protestantism ; but it has been received by some Catholics, sincere, it is true, though not discerning. It is true that the temporal prince is invested with supreme power and authority, in his order ; but from this it follows only that he is not subject to any other earthly power. It does not follow that his authority, sovereign in its order, cannot be subject and is not subject to another authority of a more perfect order ; that is, the spiritual. ... It is necessary that whoever holds power, even sovereign, for temporal rule shall be regulated by the Roman Pontiff (pp. 161-63). 1 Civiltd Cattolica, VII. ii. p. 150 ff. POWER OF THE CONFESSOR 159 So far for the independence of the State. Now as to its right of intervention in mixed questions, and above all, as to the defining of limits between the two powers — The State ought first to learn, from the Church, what are mixed questions, that it may not take spiritual matters for mixed ones, confounding both the one and the other with those which are called temporal ones. Each separate kind of corn must be tied up into a separate sheaf. The State ought to arrange with the Church every time it puts a hand to what is temporal in these mixed matters, in order that it may not violate what is spiritual. The Civiltd quotes M. Renan, where he shows how the SyUabus has proved his assertion of 1848. " The Syllabus is a luminous demonstration of the proposition I maintained, that Catholicism and liberty are two things incompatible." The Civiltd adds that, in order to know this fact, M. Renan did not need to be a profound theologian, but only needed to read the works of any author sincerely Catholic. It points out that the Liberal Catholics fancy that the Popes, in condemning liberty of worship and of the Press, only spoke of part of the subject, that is, of some sorts of liberty ; and that it was, therefore, some liberty, not all, that they called madness, poison, and pestilence. But the Popes, asserts the Civiltd, on the contrary, thought that aU liberty of worship and of the Press bore those characters (P- 314)- The Abbe Falcimagne insisted (p. 316) that the supposed penitent should be at once treated as a sick man, and as being not of sound reason — He comes to submit himself to my tribunal, and at the same time rejects my authority. To see how far I can yield to his spiritual infirmity I must see how far the authority of the confessor over the penitent extends. On this point, I shall cite the words of Domenico Soto, who, after hearing the confession of Charles V, said, " So far, you have confessed the sins of Charles ; now confess those of the Emperor." Soto at least thought that the actions of his penitent, although they belonged to the political order, neverthe less came within the cognizance of his tribunal. Our patient is of a diametrically opposite opinion. He will not recognize in me the right of judging him in what touches doctrine and morals 160 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE indirectly. But I hold that, as confessor, I have a right to judge my penitent, be he a legislator, or even a prelate of the Church, in things pertaining to dogmas and morals, and to prohibit what is contrary to either, whether directly or indirectly. So I can com mand him to cease from holding presumptuous tenets. The Archbishop then asked the Abbe Falcimagne, requesting him to give a direct answer, if he had a right to order his penitent to leave a hundred thousand francs in his wUl to be distributed among the poor. To this the Abbe Falcimagne made no reply. He said the point now was to know whether the penitent, who would not renounce his modern ideas as to liberty, was or was not guilty of presumption, temerarius. " Guilty of presumption," replied the Archbishop, " is that confessor who lays his hands on temporal things, assessing what he has no right to assess." " But," retorted Falcimagne, " I have the right to judge my penitent as to his disposition ; and if he comes to me, and says that he wishes to maintain his principles, and declares that I have not a right to judge him, I tell him that his pretensions are illegitimate ; that his reason is disordered by modern principles ; and that, if he wiU not renounce those principles, I cannot absolve him." The Civiltd thinks that, at this point, they came to the heart of the matter. On one side they began to aUege that the con fessor could not require his penitent to renounce his opinions unless they were heretical, or were opinions condemned by the Church. A very false doctrine ! exclaims the oracle ; for, in addition to heretical opinions, a true Catholic must renounce many others — those, for instance, which are proximate to heresy ; those which are presumptuous, scandalous, and aU indeed that are offensive to pious ears. The teaching power of our Church is not merely infaUible, and not only does it define with infaUibUity when defining articles of faith, but also when defining any truth, scientific or practical, political or historical, which is connected, in any manner whatever, with dogma and morals ; and whoever would be a sincere Catholic must conform not only in respectful silence, but with interior assent of the intellect (p. 318). CONDEMNATION OF OPINIONS 161 The Civiltd proceeds to quote the opinions of the " good journals " of Italy, laying stress on the point that the opinions held by the supposed penitent could not be probable opinions- being in fact those which were already condemned in the SyUabus. It proceeds with great vigour to maintain that the SyUabus was the decree, not only of the Pope, but also of the five hundred bishops who had adhered to it last year (1867). Of these, the Civiltd correctly says that Darboy himself was one. It next contributes an important item of information, which completes the evidence of the perfect and formal ecclesiastical authority of all the condemnations of the SyUabus, on either theory of the constitution of the Church, the Papal or the Episcopal. After the address of the five hundred bishops present in Rome, aU the absent ones, asserts the Civiltd, sent in their adhesion by letter, which they hastened to forward to this Roman chair, where, with the living Pontiff, resides the " spirit of truth " (p. 324). Hence it draws the inference, which is a just conclusion, if we may say so, in the face of a hundred English writers who, following an old tradition, when reviewing what Dr. Newman put upon paper on this subject, called it logical. This penitent (says the great organ of the Vatican), openly opposes the teaching power of the Church, whether that teaching power is considered as being exercised by the Bishop of Rome alone, or as being exercised by him in conjunction with all the bishops of Christendom. That teaching power has pronounced in the one mode and in the other, and has proscribed those opinions. In both ways has it condemned opinions, not imaginary or belonging to bygone times, but opinions which to-day, and under our eye, are pertinaciously maintained and reduced to practice " (p. 324). Returning with intense earnestness to this point, it says (P- 543)— The universal Bishop has spoken alone, and further, he has spoken conjointly with the bishops of the particular Churches. To contradict after this, is in effect to separate oneself from the whole of the pastors, and from him who is supreme among them all. This is not enough. Some pages later, hesitation, on this vol. 1. 11 1 62 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE question so vital to practical government, is again censured, in replying to the plea that the supposed penitent might be worthy of absolution on the ground of invincible ignorance — * We shall never tell him that ignorance consists in this, namely, that after he has read the Encyclical and the Syllabus, and re-read them, he could not understand that the modern opinions, which he retained, have been truly condemned, or that they have been condemned rightfully. This is not ignorance. It is an error and a pertinacity proper to a man not far removed from heresy. In this case, we once more repeat, confession is not the thing wanted. The first elements of the faith, and of the Catholic profession, have to be set straight in this man's head (p. 547). It would almost seem as if Montalembert was personally pointed at in the two later articles. It is not a little curious to learn here that his bosom friend, Lacordaire, long the charm of the French pulpit, was called to Rome in 1850 to answer for his doctrine. The points on which he had to set himself right with Rome were anything but, in our sense, religious ones : (1) The coercive power of the Church ; (2) The origin of sovereignty ; and (3) The temporal power of the Pope. He did set himself right. Father Jandel, the General of the Dominicans, exulting over his answer on the question touching the coercive power, says, " It avenges his memory from the suspicion of complicity with certain opinions which some Catholics would fain shelter under the authority of his name." 1 Avenges his memory ! It proves that whatever Lacordaire believed, he submitted to write as his own the doctrine of Rome, that the Church has power to " employ external force," and to inflict bodfly pains. And so France sees the memory of her Bossuet held up to reproach, and the memory of her Lacordaire yoked by the Dominican General to his beloved Inquisition. She sees her Montalembert driven from public life, assailed, yea, reviled, while living, preparatory to being insulted when dead. Any one acquainted with the high spirit and immense emo tional force of Montalembert, can imagine his reddening and shivering at finding the following among the citations from 1 Serie VII. vol. iii. p. 65. THE INQUISITION 163 Renan to prove that the sceptic understood the doctrine of " Catholicism " better than its professed friends in France — The remedy applied by the Church of Rome to the liberty of worship and liberty of thought is the Inquisition. The Councils have established and approved the Inquisition, the Fathers and bishops have counselled and practised it. The Inquisition is the logical outgrowth of the whole orthodox system, and the quint essence of the spirit of the Church.1 Strongly as our sympathies are with Montalembert and Darboy, we feel that, so long as the Jesuits have to prove that persecution is the doctrine and has been the practice of the Church, they have it all their own way against the Liberal Catholics, tUl they creep up to the early ages. 1 Serie VII; vol. iii. p. 56. CHAPTER V What is to be the Work of the Council — Fears caused by Grandiose Projects — Reform of the Church in Head and Members — Statesmen evince Concern. CURIOSITY as to what the particular work of the Council was to be grew all the more rapidly, because no authorita tive indication of it was given. Were the Jesuit tenets of Papal authority and Papal infaUibUity to be raised into dogmas ? Was the Pope to make another offering to the Virgin by pro claiming as an article of faith, that her body had been carried to heaven ? By the repetition of such questions, tens of millions partiaUy awoke to the consciousness that they belonged to a religion which knew not what might be its standard of faith next year, much less did it know to what particular tenets it might be committed. Then, as to the position of the bishops, were they to be only counciUors, or also judges ? If the latter, they would first hear the doctors, as did their predecessors at Trent ; would next deliberate, and finaUy would formulate decrees, which decrees without alteration, would be confirmed by the Pontiff. But if the bishops were no longer judges of the faith, but simply counciUors of the one judge, their place would be to argue points, as the doctors had done at Trent, whUe the decree should be that of the Pope, and they would merely assent. Again, as to the composition of the Council, were the bishops in partibus to be members ? Was Darboy, whose diocese counted two miUions of souls, to be balanced by some Court creature with a title from Sardis or Ecbatana ? or was Schwarz- enberg, with Bohemia at his back, to be balanced by an instru ment of the Curia, who, independently of his patrons, had not a month's bread to caU his own ? Were those who repre- 164 QUESTIONINGS AS TO PROJECTS 165 sented ancient and numerous churches, and who were as far free agents as men under Rome can be, to be voted against, man for man, by vicars apostolic, without churches, or with only new and ignorant ones — men depending on the Propaganda even for their travelling expenses and board ? FinaUy, as to the mode of procedure, were the bishops, as they did at Trent, to agree upon their own rules of procedure, to evolve by mutual consultation the questions demanding solu tion, and to discuss them tfll aU were ready to vote ? Or could there be truth in the suspicion that everything was being cut and dried beforehand, and that the Court would impose ready- made rules of procedure, and allow no one but itself to intro duce any subject for discussion ? As to the burning question of moral unanimity, would pro jected formulae be passed from hand to hand, as was done at Trent, examined in meetings of groups, retouched, and, if need be, remoulded tUl a form was arrived at in which aU but two or three acquiesced ? Or was it possible that formulae for new articles in a creed prepared behind the backs of the bishops would be imposed on miUions and for ever, by a majority made up with the help of the bishops in partibus ? All this time, the nine determined men forming the secret Directing Congregation, were coolly looking at the same ques tions, and, step by step, as we shaU see, when events bring out the secret plans, were settling those questions in the sense most dreaded, and going to lengths not, we believe, suggested in any of the anticipatory expressions of fear. Earnest theologians who had not been converted by the infallibUist propaganda of recent years, were thrown into con sternation. Some bishops, able administrators, saw no essen tial difference between Papal infallibility as a doctrine taught in many of the schools, and believed by great numbers if re jected by others perhaps greater, and the same opinion as an article of faith. In such a view, the men of thought saw the superficial glance of " practical men," as they call themselves, who never discover anything but by feeling it, and who live by acting out to-day what others thought out in time gone by. 1 66 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Little difference ! thought the men of foresight. We are going to be compeUed to alter our catechisms and creed in the face of the Protestants ; going to be compelled to teach the opposite of what we have always taught ; going to part with immemorial safeguards against altering the conditions of salva tion, or further narrowing the terms of membership in the Church— to part with the necessity before every such change of the open and formal process of a General Council ! The pro posed dogma is unlike any now in the creed, in the all-important point of being self -multiplying. If it is adopted, we shaU be liable to have eternal obligations laid upon our souls, without a week's warning. Beside fears like these, others perhaps more general were those of quiet Catholics wishing to live in peace and serve their respective nations loyally, who being conscious that even now they were liable to suspicion of a divided aUegiance, feared that if the Jesuit tenets became the creed, their political relations would be less comfortable, and their prospects of office not so good. " At the Vatican," says Ce qui se Passe au Concile, speaking of the mystery and the uneasiness of this moment ; " At the Vatican they spoke in low tones of grandiose projects that were to transform the world, and by exalting Pius IX were to confound the enemies of the Church." It was those grandiose projects which made good citizens fear for their own future political standing. Even feelings of this sort, as represented by Holtgreven, ought to touch us, being those of silent millions awaiting in the dark the sentence of their lords in Council. He says — When we left the gymnasium, soon after the year i860, there was no pupil who could say that, even by hint, he had been taught there that the Pope was infallible by himself, and without the con sent of the Church. The answer 128 in Martin's Handbook of Religion is still too fresh in the memory of all ; an answer which affirms that the grace of infallibility belongs only to the collective body of bishops, as successors of the Apostles. . . . Persons in office and out of it, clergy, laity, and exalted Church dignitaries, agreed that the pretensions of the Pope to power over kings and nations, in matters of allegiance and such like, were not part of REMARKABLE AUSTRIAN PAMPHLET 167 their religion, but arose out of the state of the civil laws in the middle ages. . . . Thus does the Catholic teacher teach in his lectures on Church history, thus does the student learn ; and this view, which captivates the youth, putting his German heart at rest, and rejoicing it, still gives him repose and removes every scruple when, as a man, he lifts up the hand to swear allegiance to the laws of the fatherland.1 Those of the French clergy whose education had been carried beyond the usual round of Latin, logic, and manners, began to manifest misgivings as to the effect of the impending change on men of enlarged culture. It was in March, 1869, that the Unitd published the Pope's famous letter to the Archbishop of Paris, described in a former chapter. The Paris correspondent of that journal, commenting upon it, caUs the dignitary who, in the eye of the world, would be his metropolitan and ordinary, " a pretty fellow" — bet soggetto — whom no one would any longer look upon as a candidate for the rank of Cardinal. In the same letter he says that war against Prussia must break out, whether the occasion be the Belgian railways, or complaints that Prussia violates the treaty of Prague. Fears as to coming changes, in their effect on men of culture, were felt stiU more deeply in Germany, where the general education of the clergy was higher than elsewhere. Both the German clergy and the nobler of the French were unprepared for what they began, in secret, to call Pius-cult, as it appeared in the language employed by the favoured organs. One word in the prayer for the Pope, recommended by the Unitd, on March 12, grated not on Protestant ears only. The Ave Maria was for a week to be followed by these petitions : " Eternal Father, defend Pius IX ! Eternal Word, assist Pius IX ! Holy Spirit, glorify Pius IX ! " Perhaps none of the publications now flowing from the Press excited greater attention than one which was announced as being from the pen of one of the best known of the Austrian clergy. It was entitled The Reform of the Romish Church in Head and Members. Not only does this author oppose the 1 Holtgreven, pp. 4, 5. 168 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE attempt to restore laws enforcing unity of creed, but he actuaUy does so on principle, as weU as on the ground of expediency. The longing of Rome for the subjection of the States of the world, and for power again to employ the arm of the State in her service, is, he contends, a delusion which will lead only to her overthrow. Moreover, he lays down the startling principle that the Church has nothing to ask but liberty to act in her own sphere like any private society. This last position is utterly irreconcilable with all the ordinary theories. He holds that anything granted to the Church by the State beyond what is given to any other private society is an evU, and also that every case, in the past, wherein Church and State have joined hands in order to help one another to gain their respective ends, has turned out ill for both of them. In modern times his ideal of the normal relation of Church and State is that existing in America, which he imagines works favourably for Romanism. The author of Reform in Head and Members looks on the system of lower seminaries for boys and higher ones for young men, in which the future clergy pass their youth separated from all society, leading an unreal life, pursuing narrow studies and without knowledge of men, or the possibility of acquiring any breadth of mind, as producing only a race of priests unfit to lead an educated age. He declares that in France, Italy, and Spain the system of close seminaries has destroyed theological science among Catholics. He manifests the ordinary contempt of German scholars for the showy and wordy pupils of the Roman seminaries, and contends that Catholic theology does not bear any comparison, as to talent and learning, with Protestant theology in any country except Germany, where the priests have to study at the universities . He further believes that the lamentable moral condition of the Romish clergy is not a little to be ascribed to the seclusion and unreality in which their youth is passed (p. 161). The young priests in whose hands the guidance of the people is to be placed, squander the fair and precious years of youth in enclosures shut off from the world, and out of them do they go forth into life without experience of men or of the world. Then does REFORMS DEMANDED 169 the world, with aU its charms, allurements, delights, and seductions, rush in upon those narrow, inexperienced young clergymen ; and alas ! only too many of them sink in a sea which to them is new, strange, and untried. He demands a thorough reform of this system, insisting that the contempt shown by aU respectable Italians for the priest hood is not to be accounted for except on the ground of this wretched system and of its wretched moral and religious results. Another demand boldly made by this Austrian priest is for the abolition of the vows of celibacy, so far as they are either perpetual or obligatory. He would admit of vows that were both voluntary and temporary. The corrupting effects Of celibacy evidently leave him no hope that it is capable of being rendered consistent with tolerable morality. He treats this institution as purely local and Romish, regarding its imposition upon the Catholic Church as a great public evil, impossible to be justified. At page 117 he says, " Upon the law of the Romish Church fall back all those moral abominations, beyond measure and beyond number, which have arisen out of it, and which wUl stain the Church as long as that law remains in force." When the writer approaches the subject of bureau cratic centralization, the Catholic rises against the Romanism which has fastened itself on the Churches of other nations. This system of centralization as carried out by the Curia is much too narrow legitimately to claim the name of national. Our author wants to see an end of the system. He wonders what may be the annual revenue paid into Rome from aU quarters of the globe for indults, dispensations, indulgencies, remissions of sins, and the fees gained by aU the inven tions for what he caUs seUing poor parchment and bad writing very dear. He does not, like many writers when they touch this subject, break out into a passion against the huck stering of their religion, but manifests a cold contempt, feeling that the system is low and hollow. The modern contrivance for making a bishop a tenant on a short lease is calmly exposed. Formerly, as the author points 170 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE out, a bishop used to rule his own diocese ; now he is no more than a delegate. He is aUowed to distribute such dispensa tions for the smaller sins against Church law as do not pay any money tax, but his power to do this, as also his power to per form several other of the acts essential to his office, is no longer conveyed to him with the office itself. On the contrary, for that power he is dependent upon a lease, never given for more than five years, called the Quinquennial Faculties. If at the expiration of one of these terms the Faculties are not renewed, he becomes a mere lay figure in his chair, and would be at once exposed to his clergy and people as under disgrace. By this means is he kept a perpetual pensioner on the favour of the Curia, and in addition to the periodical expiration of the ordinary lease, he is a tenant at will, liable any day to have his Faculties withdrawn by the Holy Father. The centralizing of the government of the Church in the See of Rome, to effect which it was necessary to destroy the rights of metropolitans and to curtail the jurisdiction of bishops, is a state of things so unjustifiable and ruinous, that the well-being of the Church urgently'^demands its removal. This absorption of all the powers and rights of Church government is not to be justified either by pleading the necessity of preserving the unity of the Church, or by pleading the supreme hierarchical power, which belongs to the See of Rome. The very necessity of manifesting unity pre supposes a number of persons entrusted with independent functions of government ; and if the incumbent of the highest power of the Church strips the subordinate functionaries of all authority, he makes himself the sole seat of power in the Church. This writer would restore worship in the mother tongue. Statesmen began to feel concern, at least such as did not belong to the class finely laughed at by M. VeuiUot, who do not think it necessary to inform themselves on " the small affairs of the Catholic Church," although speaking, legislating, and per haps writing on matters of which those affairs form a consider able element. Naturally such fears were sooner and more seriously felt by Roman Catholic statesmen than by Protestant ones. Though BISHOPS UTTER FORECASTS 171 Von Lutz, Minister of Worship in Bavaria, spoke after the event, he tersely expressed the apprehensions felt at this time— The Church lays down the principle that the Pope is Prince of princes, and Lord Paramount (Oberherr) of all States. Do you think it possible that States will put up with that ? That the State will quietly stand by while the bishop orders the parish priest to preach against the law of the land, and while he deposes him if he will not comply ? Or must the State itself drive the parish priest out of his home for refusing to misuse the pulpit, against the State ? " 1 Bishop Fessler, of St. Polten,2 in a lengthy manifesto, gave a clear intimation that the infaUibility of the Pope would probably be defined by the CouncU. This set many Catholics in Germany on preparing to combat the intention announced, and set stiU more on saying that as Fessler had been the first to face the German public with this intimation, his fortune was made at Rome. Bishop Dupanloup, of Orleans, put forth his best literary power in what was caUed, by the Constitutionnel, an attempt to bring about a reconciliation between the Council and the principles of 1789. 3 He urged that they greatly erred who looked upon the approaching Council as a menace against modern society, or as a declaration of war with progress. On the contrary, freedom, fraternity and progress, so far as they were true and good, had nothing to fear from this " senate of humanity." Bishop Von Ketteler, of Mainz, declared that the forthcoming Council was the greatest event of our age i — At least (added this doughty pupil of the Jesuits), in the work of reconstruction ; for as to destruction, certainly, there have been greater events. As God provided for the Church and the world in the century of the so-called Reformation, by means of the Council of Trent, so has He in our century, which, still sadder to say, is the century of Revolution, the century of demolition and universal destruction, inspired the High Pontiff with the supreme remedy, the convocation of the Vatican Council. The work of destruction 1 Menzel, Jesuitenumtriebe, p. 119. 2 Das Letzte und das Ndchste Concil, p. 59. 3 Lettre sur le futur Concile CEcumenique. 4 Das Allgemeine Concil und seine Bedeutung fur unsere Zeit. 172 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE is manifestly hasting to its end. It is time to commence the work of reconstruction, on the ancient foundation laid by Christ once for all. This is precisely the work to which the Council is called. These words we quote from the Civiltd, to which the whole document seemed highly laudable.1 But its translation is strong. Ketteler did not use the term " reconstruction " for his German audience, but " construction." He did not say that God had inspired the Pontiff, but that the Spirit of God again assembled the General Council, the highest Court of Judgment for the Truth on earth. This last form of words had the merit of which our English tongue has within the last few years presented some examples of aU but incredible skiU — the merit of suggesting to a Protestant an idea that would not awaken his political fears, and yet of representing to the Jesuits of the Civiltd the true doctrine. The Pope himself began to take part in the controversy now graduaUy rising. The Abbe Belet had translated into French the work of the Jesuit Father Weninger, published in New York. The Pope wrote a brief to thank him, taking occasion at the same time harshly to censure the great Bossuet, as a bishop who, in order to flatter the civfl power, contradicted his own proper opinions, and contradicted the original doctrine of the Church.2 Pleasant to the military palate of Pius IX were the words of brave Colonel AUet, in a soldierly order of the day, issued in December, to his zouaves. After recounting in terse, strong terms, their services against the Garibaldians, he says — Soldiers ! all is not over. Great dangers stiU threaten the Church. Remember that in your regiment you stand, not merely as soldiers marching side by side ; you also represent a principle before the world, the principle of the voluntary and disinterested defence of the Holy See. You are the nucleus around which will unite in the hour of danger the prayers, the succours, and the hopes of the Catholic world. Be, then, true soldiers of God. You have not merely duties, you have even a mission, and you will not fulfil it without union, discipline, moral conduct, and military instruction. A third battalion is formed. Your swelling ranks assure to you a 1 Serie VII. vol. vi. p. 93. 2 Friedberg, p. 487. CHURCH INFALLIBILITY 173 larger part in future struggles. We shall march together to the cry of " Long Live Pius IX ! " Funereal solemnities on behalf of the faUen are proudly recorded as having been celebrated in France, England, Ger many, etc. To these military consolations were added such as a crown and a nation once great could now bestow. Queen IsabeUa strongly recommended from the throne, and her Cortes almost unanimously voted, that the forces of the nation, acting in aUiance with the Emperor of the French, should be ready to defend the Holy See.1 What was more important, the King of Prussia, in reply to Ledochowsky, spoke clearly in support of the temporal power. It was also told with satisfaction how, at banquets, both at Malines and Namur, the health of the Pope was drunk before that of the King of Belgium, and how pleasantly the Nuncio gave the health of the local and sub ordinate sovereign after that of his master, as the Lord Para mount, had received its meed.2 It is not easy for us, whose faith has always rested on the fixed standard of God's Word, to enter into all the feelings of suspense which are to be read between the lines of a lecture by Professor Menzel, then of Braunsberg, now of Bonn, printed for private circulation among his former pupUs.3 He is teach ing them the doctrine of Church infaUibUity, but not, as he had hitherto done, in the twofold confidence of persuasion and personal security. Persuasion abides , reinforced by fresh study and animated by assault. But security is gone. The con sciousness that he may never more be allowed to teach this doctrine weighs upon aU he utters. Before another session, should his own faith not change, that of his chair probably will. The Church which he had served, as permitting the membership of those who denied the infaUibUity of the Pope, had been catholic enough for him. But now, after pausing since the 1 Civiltd, VII. i. pp. 228-30. 2 Id. 622. 3 Ueber das Subject der kirchlichen Unfehlbarkeit. (Als Manuscript gedruckt.) Braunsberg : 1870. 174 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Reformation, she had actively resumed the process of narrowing the terms of membership by dogmatizing new shibboleths. One had been already added in his own day. Another now hung overhead, still more momentous, because it not only altered the doctrine of the Church, but altered the standard of doc trine, and was moreover self-propagating — a seed bearing fruit after its kind. "This complete subversion of the old Catholic principle, everywhere, always, and by all," cries the poor Professor, " has found its most doughty champions in the Jesuits of the Civiltd Cattolica, with their branch at Maria Laach, and in the Arch bishops of Malines and Westminster, Deschamps and Man ning." J In the struggling argument of the Teacher of this year, we cannot help hearing, by anticipation, the sighs of the excommunicated of next year ; excommunicated for holding fast what he had always taught, with the sanction of the Church, and from one of her chairs ! And as the iron enters into his soul, he evidently feels it hard that an English hand should be one of the foremost in driving it home. Professors looked from the chair on their classes not know ing what they might have to teach a twelvemonth hence. Preachers looked from the pulpit on their congregations weighted with the same uncertainty. Editors wrote that the Catholic faith was thus and thus, feeling that, perhaps, soon they must write the reverse, or else drop the pen. Heads of famUies were perplexed as to what they should say to their children, if compeUed to believe what they and their fathers had always resented as a false accusation against their religion. Jurists wondered if they must either break with their clergy or begin a campaign for reinstating canon law over civil. Kings whose forefathers had compelled nations, by the sword, to wear the yoke of Rome, chafed to think that their religion was to be "changed over their heads." But all this time the silent arbiters of the Catholic's destiny were patiently framing the decrees. Men moved and combined to prevent new fetters from being forged for their souls next year ; but link was being THE FORGE OF THE VATICAN 175 already noiselessly added to link, by old, cool, and resolute masters. The Emperor set to defend the Gallican liberties for the millions of France, and the Emperor set to uphold the Josephine safeguards for the millions of Austria, had no access to the subterranean forge Antra Mtnaea where chains and thunderbolts were on the anvil, away from the ears of men. Turnus had not less power over the island cave where the arms by which he was to fall were being tempered. But, on the other hand, the Vulcan of the Syllabus had more than one Venus at the Court of each potentate, wooing in his interests, and pleading for his wUl. The truth, however, was to dawn upon their subjects from behind gorgeous clouds of their beloved pomps and ceremonies. CHAPTER VI Agitation in Bavaria and Germany— The Golden Rose — Fall of Isabella — The King of Bavaria obtains the Opinion of the Faculties — Dollinger — Schwarzenberg's Remonstrance THE proximity of Bavaria to Italy on the one hand, and to Protestant Germany and Switzerland on the other, had assisted in giving to the schools of Munich a juster apprecia tion of the effect to be expected in the world at large, from new additions to the dogmatic burden which Catholics must carry. For a considerable time a conflict had been silently growing up between the theology of the German schools and that in recent years imported direct from Rome by the new type of priests there trained. The catechisms — even those prepared by the early Jesuits — had been gradually altered, till first the denial of Papal infaUibUity disappeared, and secondly the statement of Church infallibility was so obscured as to prepare the way for further change. Jesuit establishments had been springing up in defiance of the law. The Ultramontane Press had raged against the unity of Germany under the leadership of Prussia, writing so as to lead foreigners to believe that France had only to invade Ger many and she would find the Catholics on her side. A littera teur named Fischer being arrested at Landeck in June, 1868, a letter was found from Count Platen, saying, " A league of the smaU states with France, for the common end of break ing the power of Prussia, is the duty of all." x The feelings of the educated classes generally resented such attempts with indignation. We have seen how Sepp spoke of the canonization of Arbues. The painter Kaulbach executed a picture of an auto da fe celebrated under the eye of this new 1 Menzel, Weltbegebenheiten, Band i. p. 123. 176 ISABELLA AND THE GOLDEN ROSE 177 celestial patron. A priest preached against the sale of the engravings ; and Kaulbach wrote a letter, which was printed in the Cologne Gazette, hailing such reproach as an honour, and appending a sketch of the Roman twins drinking in the mUk of the she-wolf. Of his Romulus and Remus, one wore the crown of imperial France, and the other the tiara.1 German writers assert that Napoleon III induced Queen Isabella of Spain, in the spring of 1868, to pledge herself to send into Italy forty thousand men to protect the Pope, in case he should be obliged to withdraw his troops by entering on a war with Prussia. Other authorities say that it was to be in case of a war with Italy. At all events, the most select favour the Pontiff had to confer on the worthiest lady of his Church, the golden rose, was sent to her most Catholic Majesty. This distinction placed Isabella on a level with the Queen of Naples and the Empress Eugenie, the only two lambs in all his fold hitherto held worthy by Pius IX of this pontifical seal of stainless whiteness. But to the daughter of Queen Christina the golden rose proved to be the last rose of her summer. In September 1868 this elect lady, after outliving more insurrec tions than any sovereign in Christendom, was compelled to flee. An expression fell from the Catholique of Brussels on the news that the crown of IsabeUa was threatened, which throws light on the Ultramontane dialect : " Spain wiU be lost to Catholicism, lost to the cause of order in Europe, and the last Christian government will have disappeared from the Old World." 2 This drew from Montalembert the remark : " To wish modern society, or any Christian born in that society and destined to live in it, to esteem the condition of Spain under Isabella II more highly than that of England under Victoria, and to wish this in the name of the Catholic Church, in the name of the party of order in Europe, is to impute to that party and to that Church the saddest of responsibilities, and the most menacing." 3 Menzel, Jesuitenumtriebe, p. 21. Quoted by Montalembert,, Bibliothique Universelle 1876, p. 194. Ibid. p. 195. VOL. I_ 1,2. 178 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE But all Catholic political personages were not as good Papists as Queen Isabella. Montalembert, full of thoughts suggested by the questions rising in the Church, saw in her fall but an incident of the decay of Spain, which, again, was but the most striking example of the condition of most Roman Catholic countries. He wrote what, as we have seen, appeared only after his death. Confess ing that the reign of Isabella had lasted " too long," he traced the ruin of the country to " despotism, spiritual and temporal, absolute monarchy, and the Inquisition." After showing that both municipal and parliamentary liberties had been weU developed in Spain in the days when she struggled, rose, and took the lead, he dates the beginning of her faU from the com bination of Church and State, under Charles V, to work unitedly in quenching civU and religious liberty. Though no advocate of the separation of Church and State, he says, " A thousand times better the fullest separation with all its excesses, than the absorption of the State by the Church, or of the Church by the State." No better expression could have been chosen than the former of these phrases to designate the effect of the Jesuit polity of Church and State just about to be adopted by Rome. He takes the social and political effects of the Inquisition to have been disastrous — " That monstrous institution ceased to act only when it had no more to do, when it had substituted emptiness, death, and nothingness for the life, the force, and the glory of the first nation of the middle ages, the one which we may justly call the pearl of the Catholic world." Aiming a two-edged thrust at Bonapartist legislatures, and at the character of the coming Council, he says that the " ill-omened " Charles V was the inventor " of consultative despotism, or representative absolutism, of which the Napoleons are wrongly accused of being the originators. For one who had spent his life in battling for the Papacy, but always with the hope of reconciling it to liberty, it was bitter, when death was in view, to write : " There is not in the history of the world a second example of a great country so ruined, so broken down, so OPINIONS OF FACULTIES 179 fallen, without foreign conquest or civil war having materially contributed to the result, but by the sole effect of institutions of which it was the prey." x Had the Prime Minister of Bavaria at the juncture in ques tion been a Protestant, he would have been slower in seeing the political bearings of what was taking place. One of the three brothers of Prince Hohenlohe was a cardinal, and otherwise his means of information had been good. Besides, though Bavaria had often served the Papal cause to the hurt of Germany, it had never, like Prussia, given up its placet and other guards of the royal supremacy. The Prime Minister submitted questions for the formal opinion of the two Faculties of Theology and Law, in the University of Munich, as to the effect which the definition of Papal infaUibUity as a dogma would have upon the relations of the civil and ecclesiastical authorities. The Faculty of Theology, in its reply, after referring to the work of Schrader, and quoting some of his propositions, says — Should these or similar conclusions be adopted (i.e. the con clusion of the Syllabus against freedom of religion, of the Press, etc.), it would lead to great confusion. The counter principles are so established, both in the theory and practice of all European constitutions, that anything contrary to religious equality and free dom of opinion can scarcely again obtain a footing. Were it laid upon Catholics, as a duty of conscience, to repudiate those prin ciples, undeniably collision between their civil and ecclesiastical obligations would result, and in certain circumstances consequences would ensue, burdensome and hurtful both to the individual mem bers of a national Church and to the collective body.2 The statesmen had asked the divines what was meant by speaking ex cathedra. The Faculty replied that among those who asserted the doctrine of Papal infallibility, there were some twenty theories on the subject, none of them authoritative or generaUy received, and all arbitrary ; " because here it is impossible to frame a theory from Scripture and tradition." 3 The Faculty of Law said — 1 Bibliothique Universale de Lausanne, 1876, p. 27. 2 Friedberg, Aktenstucke, p. 300. 3 Ibid. p. 302, 180 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Should the propositions of the Syllabus and the Papal infalli bility be made dogmas, the relations between State and Church hitherto subsisting would be altered in their very principles, and nearly all the legislation fixing the legal position of the Catholic Church in Bavaria would be called in question.1 The chief of the Theological Faculty was Dr. DoUinger, whose aged but erect head was to every scholar in the Univer sity a crown of glory. The professors were proud of him, and of their attainments made under his eye. In common with the scholars of other Catholic seats of learning in Ger many, they habitually manifested contempt for the Doctores Romani, the imported pupils of the Jesuits from the Collegium Germanicum or other seminaries in Rome — a feeling which they extended to the great bulk of the men of the Curia. DoUinger had been a firm Tridentine Romanist, devoutly bearing the burden of the new dogmas which the CouncU of Trent bound up and laid upon men's shoulders. But being profoundly versed in antiquity, he was not disposed for more accretions of the same sort, and he had long been detested by the Jesuits, as standing in the old paths and resisting their innovations. Superstitions newly carried over the Alps did not thrive under his eye. As a historian he had not feared to narrate and censure the enormities of Popes. WhUe these agitations were arising in the provinces, the secret preparations in Rome were being pushed forward. The fact became known that the six Commissions were at work. The names of those serving upon them no sooner transpired than a cry arose that only favourites of the Jesuits were appointed. So few names from Germany appeared that offence was given, even in a national point of view. This feeling increased when it appeared that celebrities of whom the Catholic faculties were proud had been passed over, and that inferior men, known only for devotion to the Curia, had been selected. These feelings were partly theological, partly personal, and yet more strongly 1 Ibid. pp. 313-23. Archbishop Manning places the time when these questions were put "about the month of September 1869," being " about " half a year too late, as he places the publication of Janus about a year too early. — Vatican Decrees, p. 1 14. DISSATISFACTION 181 patriotic. The Germans knew that a double perU for the Fatherland lurked in the anti-unionist policy of Rome — peril of disruption from within, and of invasion from France. Dissatisfaction must have run tolerably high when Cardinal Prince Schwarzenberg wrote to Cardinal AntoneUi, formaUy remonstrating as to the selection made. The fact, he sub mitted, that all those selected belonged to one well-defined theological school, was in itself open to objection. As to the reputation of the favourites, he said, " I have had fears lest their qualifications should not prove equal to their weighty responsibUities." He names Munich, Bonn, and Tubingen, as Universities where fit men were to be found as weU as at Wiirzburg, and goes so far as to mention names, among them that of DoUinger. This letter was politely answered by AntoneUi, after a couple of months. He said that Dollinger would have been invited only that his Holiness had learned that he would not accept the duty." *- One of the theologians at whom the innuendo of Cardinal Schwarzenberg was aimed was Hergenrother. Yet Archbishop Manning wrote to Macmillan's Magazine, and, after speaking of the men of Munich as if they were of little more account in the esteem of students than in that of ecclesiastical courtiers, told us that if we wanted to learn anything of the true relation of Catholics to national law, we must not go to them, but must study Hergenrother.2 1 Both letters are given in Documenta ad Illustrandum Concilium Vaticanum, I. Abtheil, pp. 277-80. 2 No. 183, p. 259. CHAPTER VII Intention of proposing the Dogma of Infallibility intimated— Bavarian Note to the Cabinets, February to April, 1869— Arnim and Bis marck. IT was in February, 1869, that the fears and hopes which had long been more or less distinctly directed to a given point, were both quickened by fresh light. The Civiltd Cattolica, in the letter of its French correspondent, published suggestions that the CouncU should sit for but a short time, that it should proclaim the doctrines of the SyUabus, and that the infaUibUity of the Pope should be adopted by acclamation. It was at once alleged that the finger of Pius himself gave this sign. The suggestions thus made explain what the Cardinals consulted in the first instance meant when they hoped that the Council would not last so long as some might think. They had in 1854 induced the bishops to acclaim a new dogma, and in 1867 to accept the Syllabus without demur, and surely they could get any portions of that document which it was necessary, for greater clearness, to formulate into decrees, passed in the same delightful way ; and this would be stUl more desirable for the dogma of infallibility. Archbishop Manning treated the idea of an intended acclamation as a pleasantry ; but he charged the ventilation of it on a wrong time and on a wrong publication. " Janus first announced the discovery of the plot." 1 It may have been Janus who first clearly indicated a certain English prelate as the man chosen by the party of acclamation to give the signal. But he was long behind the first to announce the plot. The laity generaUy were offended and alarmed, at least those north of the Alps, and many bishops who were ready to vote for the Curia did not feel flattered at 1 Priv. Pet., Part III. p. 37. isa "CATHOLIC ARMS" 183 having the whole world informed that they were not wanted in Rome as judges of the faith, but as adornments of a grand pageant. The translation or assumption of the body of the Virgin was also suggested in the same article, as a doctrine which it was desirable to make into a dogma. As time wore on, the excitement became more intense. In France, the action of the government, as in most things under the Second Empire, was ambiguous. It seemed to dread the impending innovations, and every now and then what appeared to the world as a menace was half uttered. Yet it was plain that the Curia was not disturbed. Nothing can be more tranquU than the letters in the Civiltd from its French corre spondent. There is an apparent sense of solid support, such as no gusts of the popular winds will seriously shake. M. de Banneville, the acceptable representative of France in Rome, continued in his post. When the question of the presence of princes in the Council was to be faced, Cardinal AntoneUi had the comfort of treating it with this trusty friend. It was comparatively easy to convey to him the intimation which, in a few words, represented, as M. VeuiUot had showed, a radical revolution in Church and State. There were no more Catholic States. The term " Catholic arms " continued to be applied, by official writers, to those of France and the other countries which had reconquered the lost States of the Pope. But arms are perhaps, like gold and silver to the Brahmans, substances which never contract poUution. The monarchs were outside the door. Even France, whose flag at Civita Vecchia was the only protection of the temporal power, was told that she was no longer a Catholic State — she, the eldest daughter of the Church ; she whom the Pope, in parting with General FaUly, had for love of her chassepots — the " prodigious chasse- pots," as they were caUed — blessed as the " most Christian nation ! " The Curia knew that the hold of the Pope on the priests and schools was stronger than that of the Bonapartes on army and nation ; and they were rearing up their champions, whUe the Empire was wearing out its own. The same number of the Civiltd which records the death of 184 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE AntoneUi states the case in the foUowing terms. The Pontiff could not invite powers " of which one, like Italy, was in open hostility to the Church ; of which another had, like Austria, of her own motion, torn up the Concordat ; and another had, like France, a turncoat and a perfidious traitor to the Holy See upon the throne." The Ultramontane priests enjoyed this disfranchisement of kings ; but they were not yet all prepared to find that the Order of Priests was also to be disfranchised. Not a man of them was to be allowed to plead in presence of the CouncU. The Car dinals, in their close and stiU Commissions, were preparing to put, not only laymen, but priests and bishops too, more on the footing of a marching army than ever before. On AprU 9, 1869, Prince Hohenlohe addressed a circular to the European Cabinets in the name of Bavaria. It was not to be believed, he said, that the CouncU would confine itself to purely theological questions, of which, in fact, none were press ing for solution. The only dogmatic point that Rome wished the Council to decide was that of Papal infaUibUity, for which the Jesuits in Germany and elsewhere were agitating. " This question," added the Prince, " reaches far beyond the domain of religion, and is in its nature highly political ; for the power of the Pope in temporal things over aU princes and nations, even such as are in separation from Rome, would be defined, and elevated into an article of faith." The smooth reply of the German Jesuit organ was that something of the kind had been said before in the Augsburg Gazette. But the circle of Church authority would remain the same, whether the organ of that authority should be the Pope singly, or the Pope in conjunction with the bishops ; just as the powers of a national government would be the same in extent, whether in the hands of a monarch or of a republican executive. This is characteristic. The discussion was not about any proposal to enlarge or contract the theoretic circle of Church power, but about a proposal to declare that the Pope alone, without the bishops, was the depositary of that power. If the theory of Rome was correct, no extension of the circle of IGNORANCE OF ROME'S TEACHING 185 power was possible, but the depositary of power was now to be changed. If, among ourselves, it was proposed to give the power of life and death to the Crown, without judge or jury, we might be told that the power of life and death was the same whether exercised by royal warrant or through the traditionary courts. The circle of power would not be extended. The Bavarian note did not elicit a practical response from other Cabinets. The reply of Austria was, perhaps, influenced by the fact that Count Beust, then Prime Minister, was a Protestant. His despatch bears marks either of non-apprecia tion of the import of terms and acts, proceeding from the Vatican, such as would be natural in one not trained to watch them, or of a desire to evade the gravity of the question. He thought it best to wait and to be on his guard.1 On behalf of Prussia, Bismarck also took up an attitude of observation, but with more insight into the reasons for the suggestion of Prince Hohenlohe. The Italian Government had expressed itself in favour of common action, but practically let things take their course. England naturaUy declined to interfere. As to France, she thought herself protected by the Concordat against aU eventualities — another proof that her statesmen handled affairs without mastering ideas. Perhaps not one of them had read what Rome had lately been teaching as the true doctrine of Concordats. The Unitd Cattolica (June 23), however, put this tranquU attitude of France in a different light — Hohenlohe is sold to Prussia, and torments the Catholics of Bavaria to push them to throw themselves into the arms of Prussia, where Catholicism enjoys the utmost liberty, thanks to the fox like policy of Bismarck. This is known in Paris, and hence Napoleon is said to have looked darkly on the perfidious proposals of the Bavarian Minister. Friedberg, pp.- 325-28. CHAPTER VIII Indulgences — Excitement — The Two Brothers Dufournel — Senestrey's Speech — Hopes of the Ruin of Germany — What the Council will do — Absurdity of Constitutional Kings — The True Saviour of Society — Lay Address from Coblenz — Montalembert adheres to it — Religious Liberty does not answer — Importance of keeping Catholic Children apart from the Nation — War on Liberal Catho lics — Flags of all Nations doing Homage to that of the Pope ON AprU ii, 1869, was issued another of those BuUs pro claiming indulgences on which the world has almost ceased to look as one of the forces of history. Nevertheless each of them is a monument to an authority obeyed by disciplined millions, as holding executive power both in this world and the other. Once more were long Latin sentences filled out to teU the faithful that he who had power to bind and to loose pro claimed to them, on the occasion of the CouncU, full remission of their sins, and indulgence, on condition of their visiting certain basUicas, and saying certain prayers.1 " This pardon," says the Archbishop of Florence, "was to extend not onlytUl the open ing of the Council, but through the whole of its continuance."2 Millions were thus put under the necessity of imbibing the con viction, that sin against our neighbour and our God admits of being cancelled in such a way, or else of seeming to believe what they did not believe, or of bowing and not asking themselves whether they believed it or not. About this time was inaugurated, with great display of dig nitaries, military and spiritual, amonument to two brothers Dufournel, who he in S. Lorenzo. The monument bears aU the emblems of martyrdom which the art of the catacombs can supply. Instead of the usual request to pray for the repose of 1 Acta, p. 18. Freiburg edition, p. 62. 2 Cecconi, p. 144. 186 DYING FOR HOLY CHURCH 187 the soul, into which Romanism fell from Christianity, stands the word of the early Christians, " They rest " — here applied because martyrdom had merited what grace was no longer believed to give. Emmanuel Dufournel, on meeting the Garibaldians, shouted to his men, " Here, lads, is the spot to die ; in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, forward ! " When expiring, he said, " I am pleased to see my blood flow from fourteen wounds for the glory of Holy Church." The people of Valentano, where he died, said to his men, " Let us kiss the bier ; we do not come to pray for his soul, but to commend ourselves to him " (VII. vi. 547). " Such " — adds the reverend writer — " such is the Christian instinct which distinguishes between combatants in any other cause, however just, and the heroes of the Christian religion." To develop instincts of this sort, it is impossible to conceive writing more skilfully adapted. And these are the men who, at every breath, call the Italians Mussulmans ! The other brother, Diodato Dufournel — young, handsome, polished, rich — soon after the death of Alfred, met Father Gerlache at daylight entering St. Peter's : " I go to say a mass for our dead on the Apostle's tomb." " I go too," replied the Captain, and they entered the crypt. The priest asked the zouave what had caused his strange absorption in prayer. " Father, I was praying to the Virgin for the favour of dying for Holy Church." Ten days afterwards he feU mortaUy wounded during the Garibaldian disturbance in Rome. When the white-headed father arrived, it was too late to see either son alive, but he was instantly received by the Pope. The sovereign tried to fasten on his breast the order of the Piano, but was blinded by his tears. Maria, the sister of Diodato and Emmanuel, came between the two weeping old men, and, guiding the hand of the Pope, fastened the decoration on the breast of her father. The writer concludes by representing the ladies of the house hereafter as pointing out to their little ones the glove, the sword, the fatal ball, and other relics, the victor palm and the exulting angels, and saying, " Their souls are in paradise, lovely and resplendent, and are interceding for us. ChUdren, kneel 188 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE down and pray to God that none of our famUy may degenerate from the example of Diodato and Emmanuel Dufournel ! " Bishop Senestrey, of Regensburg, known as a pupU of the Jesuits and an ardent Ultramontane, made a speech at Schwan- dorf , which has not yet been forgotten in Bavaria, and was soon heard of in other parts of Germany. He said — We Ultramontanes cannot yield. The antagonism can have no issue but in war and revolution. A peaceable settlement is not possible. Who makes your temporal laws ? We observe them only because a force stands behind which compels us. True laws come from God only. Princes themselves reign by the grace of God, and when they have no longer a mind to do so, I shaU be the first to overturn the throne. 1 To the Germans, who were just rising to a consciousness of their unity, the threats of breaking them up again were cruel, especiaUy when coming from within. '' The foreigner," said Sepp, " has always counted on the internal splits in the German oak, to drive in his wedge, and rend us to pieces." The scorn with which talk of recognizing Italy was treated at this proud moment, may be judged from the words of the Unitd for January 27, in an article headed, Dying with Italy or Living with the Pope. The Marquis de Moustier, it remarks, having promised to study a modus vivendi, proposed by Mena- brea, was seized by mortal Ulness. In a simUar way Morny, WaUewsky, Petri, and BiUault were struck with death, by urgent study of means for making revolution live side by side with the Pope. Parliamentary government, hateful everywhere, was viewed as monstrous in Italy. The Civiltd cannot " accurately study " the proceedings in Florence, because of " the ineffable weariness, the disgust, the disdain with which the mind is seized, on reading those speeches, often vulgar, and running over with sophism and effrontery." 2 It proceeds to say that the famous boons of 1789, liberty of worship, liberty of meeting, liberty of the Press, and liberty of instruction, led in practice " to the triumph 1 Menzel, J esuitenumtriebe, p. 178. 2 Serie VII. vol. vi. p. 234-5. HATRED OF RELIGIOUS LIBERTY 189 of irreligion, to the tyranny of the State, to unbridled licence in handling through the Press the most sacred and inviolable rights, and to the barbarizing of the young by more infamous ignorance." Yet, at the same time, it records with satisfaction efforts of its own friends to obtain liberty of instruction, after their ideal ; that is, the State giving up to the priest the control of what is taught to its subjects with its own money. The Civiltd gloried in the disappearance of the Liberal Catholic priests, utterly extinguished, as it held, by the Syllabus and by the prospect of the Council. There might still linger some slight remnant of Liberal Catholics among the laity. But Catholics in Italy were now to be noted for their hope, their joy, and their perfect withdrawal from political life. They were no more to be found seeking situations from the government, but were aU ardently drawing close to Pius IX. Since he uttered the " prophetic word," Let us wait upon events, above all since the CouncU was summoned, they had betaken themselves to pious works and to waiting on the hand of the Almighty.1 In the same publications which struggled against unity of nations, the loss of another unity was bitterly deplored. " Catholic unity " in Spain, hitherto existing by law, alas ! exclaims the Stimmen, exists in fact no longer. By religious unity is meant the state of things which forbids men to worship God except under direction of the Pope. Massimo D'Azeglio exclaimed as to Italy, Religious unity is the only unity we have left. We should say, No wonder ! The attempt to place the unity of Christians not in faith in Christ and manifestation of His spirit, but in subjection to one human being, has had just the same results as had the attempt to place the unity of mankind in obedience to one sovereign, treating aU who did not yield as enemies. Human unity is larger and nobler than one throne wiU ever shadow, and so is Christian unity. The lust of uniformity that erected the Inquisition, fettered the Press, sentenced free. opinion and free speech to death, reformed the Decalogue, and laid bonds upon the Bible, has never given a nation rest, and has only been an 1 Serie VII. vol. vi. pp. 226-27. 190 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE endless source of division and scepticism. Azeglio, in the same breath in which he speaks of this " unity," calls Italy " the ancient land of doubt," where even at the time of the Reforma tion people thought little of Rome and nothing of Geneva. And the Stimmen says that those Spaniards who had broken down " religious unity " were " not Protestants but sceptics." * So that in both Italy and Spain the result of that uniformity which is no unity, was scepticism in religion and decay in politics. To the race the bond of unity lies in a common Father, and to the Church in a common Lord. In the one case and in the other the maintenance of unity consists not in putting down variations, but in treating them with brotherly regard. Very great political significance was lent by all the Papal Press to festivities in honour of the Pope's fiftieth year of priesthood. The demonstrations of devotion to him at this moment were fervent and grand, and the supplies of money laid at his feet were immense. Great care was taken by the Civiltd to ridicule the idea of the Opinione that these mani festations had nothing to do with politics. On the contrary, cried the leaders of the " good Press," humanity, bewildered and almost in despair, was hastening to the feet of the only deliverer. All society needed a saviour, as every rational creature knew. " The Pontiff is now almost alone in the world, the representative of truth, justice, and good sense." And hence, the poor world, swimming in error, fraud and absur dity — " the world sees in Pius IX a true master, a true judge, a true sovereign, and it cleaves to him as the bulwark of society." The Syllabus suffices to prove that the Pope alone declares the truth : " the Syllabus which burst like a thunderbolt out of a serene sky, both illuminated and blasted." The nations seem to be saying, To whom should we go, but to the Supreme Pastor of the Christian flock ? — thou hast the words of eternal life. Pius IX, by rejecting the counsels of the prudent, " now has become moraUy the strongest support of order in the 1 Neue Folge, Heft iii; p. 75. ONE OR TWO CONSCIENCES? 191 world, so that those who have faUen, and those who wish not to follow them, lean upon him." And not only so, but the new queen of the world, Public Opinion, is now altogether in favour of the Roman Pontiff, and protects and saves him, almost of herself alone, against every violence and every intrigue, so that it now may almost be said that all those in the world who are not with Pius IX from love are with him by force (VII . vi. pp. 310-11). The writer then goes on to argue that the people can never understand how one and the same person can have two con sciences, one as a constitutional king and the other as a man. This, however, is a necessary condition of a constitutional king, but it is not the case in the Pontifical States, where nobody would ever suppose such a condition of things possible. The Pope has only one conscience, and neither majority nor universality of votes and suffrages would ever lead him to sanction that which is contrary to morality, to justice, to equity, and to the well understood interests of his subjects and of the flock. The Pope can say with truth, " Although all, not I " ; and on this account the eyes and the hearts of all in the world who hate fictions and impostures, and who love truth and rectitude, are turned to the Pope thus reigning and governing (p. 312). We make no attempt to inquire how many consciences a Pope may have. The Civiltd contends that he cannot have more than one. We have heard Romans contend that one is above the number. Liverani (p. 140), alluding with much personal respect to Father Mignardi, the Jesuit confessor of Cardinal AntoneUi, who, though not Pope, had much to do with the perfect model of government above commended, evidently thinks that a director of Antonelli's conscience held a sinecure. He asserts that no one knew that his Eminence had a conscience tiU April 2, i860, when he declared the fact in a despatch to Count Cavour ! And this is the language of a prelate ! The more distant prelates were already bidding their flocks farewell. The Bishop of Montreal, in doing so, cited the example of the valorous Canadian youths, who had enroUed 192 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE themselves among the zouaves to defend the Pope at the cost of their blood, exhorting his clergy with similar courage to contend against the errors pointed out by the Pope.1 From Jerusalem five priests wrote to announce that they would com mence a concert of prayer, on the slopes of Calvary : i. For the happy result of the Council ; 2. For the union of the Oriental schismatics ; 3. For the conversion of erring priests. At the same time that it announces this fact, the Civiltd, quoting from the Tablet, says that in Russia, "under the appearance of external unity, there is great division of religious sects " ; and that there is some desire for union with Rome.2 In June 1869 the Catholics of Coblentz presented an address to the Bishop of Treves, protesting against the innovations proposed by the Civiltd Cattolica, and suggesting reforms in a spirit contrary to that of the SyUabus. Great interest was excited by the warm adhesion of Count Montalembert to the address. His services, both to the spiritual and temporal power, had been conspicuous. He was now in the grip of a mortal disease. France will always respect his piety and his genius, but she will increasingly have cause to deplore the direction of his influence, as the slow but sure results of priestly power in education develop themselves. " Twice within the last few weeks," he writes, " have I touched the brink of the grave." So he feels that he may speak of this world as one whose personal interest in it is as nought. Speaking of the address, he says : "I cannot express how much I have been moved and charmed by that glorious mani festo, flowing from the reason and conscience of Catholics. . . . At last I seemed to hear a manly and a Christian tone, amid the declamations and adulations wherewith we are deafened." He would have signed " every line " of it, but he felt somewhat humbled that it did not proceed from French Catholics, with whose antecedents it would have harmonized, as well as with those convictions which made them, in the early xjCiviltd}Sex'vb VII; vol. vi.. p. 229. 2 ibid. p. 229. RELIGIOUS LIBERTY AND THE CHURCH 193 part of this century, the champions of religious liberty on the Continent.1 It was hard for the Jesuits to own that Montalembert stood in their path, to be pitilessly struck down. For the present they tried to reason. Like him, many, especiaUy in Belgium, had imbibed the conviction that civil and religious liberty were good in themselves, and might be made to work favourably for the Church, which they thought incurred great danger by setting herself in opposition to both, and by using her spiritual engines for the overthrow of constitutional government. Such men argued that the perfect liberty existing in England, the United States, and Belgium had many advantages for the Church. To reasoning of this sort the Stimmen aus Maria Laach replied by first of aU uttering encomiums on religious liberty, and also on those exceUent Catholics who favoured it, thinking it might prove best for the Church. But though this view of the case had its noble aspects, there was another side to it. Experience proved that under such a system the losses of the Church were deplorable. Not to speak of Europe, the case of the United States would suffice. As much as thirty years ago, Bishop England, of Charleston, had said that whereas the Catholics ought to have six millions of the population, they reaUy had less than two. And this terrible loss was aggravated at the present day, for considering the enormous immigration of Catholics and the addition of Mexican territory in the mean time, they ought now to number fifteen millions ; but in fact they did not dare to claim more than six. A good authority had showed that the Church lost more souls in the State of Wisconsin in a single year, than she gained in the whole Union. The loss among the children of the Irish was greater than among those of the Germans. This the writer attributes to "the pestiferous air*" of non-denominational schools, and complains that the system prevaUing in America deprives children of a well-ordered and continuous Catholic education, 1 ^Friedberg, p. 88. VOL. I, 13 194 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE such as would protect them, among other dangers, from the necessity of learning English .*- This anxiety to keep up the German tongue in America illustrates the cry raised in the German Press against that tongue being put out of the schools, both in Posen and in the Tyrol. " Liberty of instruction " had been so used that whole districts, once speaking German, had been educated into the use of Polish in the one case, and of Italian in the other. In both these countries the same reason which in America made it desirable for Rome to keep up German, turned the other way. In America, the German tongue would enclose a people, in the heart of the country, waUed off and apart from the nation. In the other cases, that tongue would be a channel connecting the people with the ebb and flow of the national mind. Even a comparatively small population, kept weU in hand, inaccessible to the common thought, and ready to obey every touch of the leaders, may be made a formidable political power. Had Wales been in the hand of Rome ! 2 Among the causes of chargin to Montalembert would be a recent article in the Civiltd, directed against the Liberal Catho lics by name, and plainly meant to thwart any influence with which they might have hoped to approach the CouncU. A pamphlet being taken as a text, the positions of the Liberal Catholics are stated, as — i. That modern nations deserve more liberty than ancient ones ; 2. That liberty of worship should be conceded, as now inevitable ; 3. That " the dis tinction between Church and State " is not now to be got rid of, and has its advantages ; 4. That Catholics ought to avail them selves of all liberties. On the first point it is replied that modern society has made only material progress, but gone back in faith and morals, and therefore deserves not more liberty than ancient society, but less. On the second point, resenting an allusion of the Liberal Catholic to the fact that Pius IX had himself granted a constitution at the opening of his reign, the 1 Stimmen, Neue Folge, Heft iv. pp. 59, 60. 2 Curious examples of this use of education are given by Menzel, Jesuitenumtriebe, PRINCES AND PUBLIC WORSHIP 195 Civiltd aUeges, first, that it was conceded in circumstances of imperious necessity ; and, secondly, that it was free from the essential faults which would deservedly brand it as Liberal— " it lacked the criminal principles of liberty of worship, of the Press, and of meeting." Moreover, it issued in the exile of the Prince, " which seems to be the inevitable result of modern constitutions." So the Pontiff was obliged to revoke it, and to condemn it to oblivion. The Liberal Catholic writer had quoted passages, even from Jesuits, to prove that it was lawful for princes, in given circum stances, to tolerate liberty of worship. Certainly, replies the Civiltd, it is lawful to tolerate it, if imperious circumstances render it necessary in order to avoid a greater evil. But that is one thing, and admitting liberty of worship as a principle is another. " What meaning have the words of the present Pontiff when he declares that liberty of conscience and of wor ship is madness, and the pest of the nations ? " What did he mean when he condemned President Comonfort for admitting religious liberty into Mexico ? Did Gregory XVI and Pius IX talk to the middle ages ? Did they teU the present generation what was suitable or not suitable for the middle ages? Catho lics may not be able to change the state of things where liberty of worship already exists, but it is in their power to prevent its entrance where it does not, and to demonstrate its criminality, and its moral and social balefulness. As to Catholics availing themselves of aU liberties, that idea is no patent of Liberal Catholics. Of course Catholics avail themselves of aU liberties of which they can make use. But to take part in the elections of a kingdom like that of Italy, formed by iniquity, and binding up in itself a perpetual sacrUege, is impossible. The words of the Bull which hurled an excommunication against king and people, are paraded, and the unfortunate Liberal Catholic is reminded that those words apply to adherents of the spoliation.1 A London correspondent ofthe Civiltd told how the journals had at first affected to ignore the CouncU, but now began to speak of it. The Anglo-Catholic party were discussing projects 1 Serie VU. vol. vi: pp. 445 ff, 196 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE of union, and he gives an account of a meeting for that purpose, not naming time or place, but making the Rev. Edward Urquhart prominent. It is said, he adds, that one bishop wiU go to the Council ; and the Ritualists think that many of their party will do so. There is much cause for hope. Some persons of high station have publicly said that they would submit to the Council, and many say so privately. They do not feel safe in Anglicanism. The prelate who replaced the Bishop of Montreal in his absence, delivered an address, from which the Civiltd repeats these words, that Pius IX had a mission, and his mission was to recall, to confirm, and to defend in the world, the law of the " Most High," the essential principle of authority, and thus to " save at once both the Church and Society." x But as a while ago we heard of toasts in which the Pope, as universal king, was put before the national king, so now on British ground is held up to admiration the trophy of banners in the Church of St. Sulpice as the fairest tribute of " New France," as Canada is called. The flags of all the societies in Montreal, and also those of aU nations, were gathered together " in homage to the standard of Pius IX, to express the obedience of the Catholic nations to the supreme authority." 2 1 Vol. vi. p. 488. 2 Ibid. p. 488. CHAPTER IX Publication of Janus — Hotter Controversy — Bishop Maret's Book — Pere Hyacinthe — the Saviour of Society again — Dress — True Doctrine of Concordats not Contracts but Papal Laws — Every Catholic State has Two Heads — Four National Governments Condemned in One Day — What a Free Church means — Fulda Manifesto — Meeting of Catholic Notables in Berlin — Political Agitation in Bavaria and Austria — Stumpf's Critique of the Jesuit Schemes LITTLE more than three months remained before the opening of the CouncU, when the intellectual movement respecting it received a new impulse. A book under the title of The Pope and the Council, by Janus, issued from the German press ; and conjecture at once ascribed the principle authorship to no less a person than Dollinger, although it was assumed that he had availed himself of aid. The profound impression made by this work may be accounted for, partly by the excite ment in the midst of which it appeared, and partly by its own force. It combined a minute knowledge of the inner history of the Church, with comprehensive views of the questions, both doctrinal and constitutional, which were now raised. After a few clear passages from modern utterances of autho rity, Janus strikes the keynote rather higher than he is prepared to sustain it — " So they find themselves under a delusion, who believed that in the Church, the spirit of the Bible, and of old Christianity, had got the upper hand of that spirit of the middle ages according to which she was a penal establishment, able to send men to prison, to the gallows, or to the stake." Beginning with the Magna Charta which Innocent III con demned, whUe he excommunicated the Barons, Janus cites case after case in which the establishment of free institutions, and especially of freedom of worship, brought down the solemn condemnation of the Pope. The case of Austria in 1868 is the 198 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE latest. With the quietness of scientific knowledge, he states what at the time would have required from an English writer arguments and proofs in detail, namely, the simple but most important fact that the oft-quoted word of the Apostle, " We must obey God rather than men," means, in the Jesuit sense, We must obey the Pope as the representative of God upon earth, and the infaUible interpreter of the Divine wiU, rather than any civil superior, or any law of the State " (p. 33). The tone of Janus is calm and scholarly, without being cold ; and the acuteness of his analysis is such as is found only where clear inteUectual insight is united to trained habits of weighing language with reference to possible interpretations by such casuists as are formed by the Curia and the Jesuits. He clearly proved that the Church was on the eve of one of the greatest constitutional changes ever effected in any com monwealth. If, in the past, the forged Decretals of the pseudo- Isidore had facilitated inroads upon the constitution of the Church, how much more would an authentic article of the creed, containing in itself the power of making any number of other articles, and assuming as its basis the unlimited authority of the Pope, pave the way to far-reaching civU and ecclesiastical encroachments ! When Archbishop Manning said of Janus that by some it was " regarded as the shaUowest and most pretentious book of the day " (Priv. Pet., iii. p. 114), he greatly moderated the tone of his Continental friends. Most bad things that could be said against a book, or its writers, were said in very bad language. The Archbishop himself could not let it pass without twice calling it " infamous," and that in a pastoral. The excitement in Germany now reached a point at which the bishops began to be alarmed. The " good Press " under took to extenuate the importance of the changes dreaded, and threw doubts on the probability of their being adopted. The perplexity became greater when, in France, appeared a book in two volumes from the pen of Monsignor Maret, said by some to be the most learned prelate in the country, and who, at all events, was Dean of the Theological Faculty of the Sorbonne. MONSIGNOR MARET'S BOOK 199 He combated the proposed innovations with French tact and sklU, raising a voice, if not for the old Gallican doctrines as a whole, at least for some remains both of them and of the liberties with which are identified the names of the most renowned Churchmen in France since the Reformation.1 The book made a profound but passing impression. It was caUed Religious Peace and the General Council ; but the Jesuit historian Sambin (p. 47) styles it a brand increasing the conflagration. The question raised was that between a constitutional but oligar chical government and a personal one for the Church. Maret holds that in her constitution a check upon the monarch was provided by the ''aristocracy," that is, the bishops (vol. ii, p. 107). The democracy is formed by the priests and the laity. But we may point out that this is very loose language. Demo cracy means a people with power, not a populace excluded from aU functions of government. The people in the Papal Church are absolutely stripped of aU part in government. They are a mere populace. The clergy are disfranchised officials. That Church is a society with a populace, but without a democracy. Before the Vatican CouncU, it had a constitutional aristocracy. Since then, the bishops are nobles without any but delegated power. Maret clearly states the famUiar fact, that in the earlier cen turies both clergy and laity took part in the election of bishops. But when he comes to speak of the part taken by kings in their election, the facts glide out of sight, as noiselessly as writers of his school generally say that they are wont to do in the hands of a Jesuit. A reader might imagine that kings first got the idea of a right in the election of bishops by some grant of the Church ; whereas even the Bishops of Rome were for a long time elected on imperial or royal order, coming from Greek or Goth, from Arian or orthodox prince, as the case might be. 1 Monsignor Maret boldly quotes Eusebius as saying (Book II. cap. xiv.) that Peter was not only the greatest and strongest of the Apostles, which is like what he says, but that he was the prince and patron of them all, which he does not say. That is said for him by the Latin translator. The one word irporjyopov, "spokesman," or cham pion, of Eusebius is deliberately turned into the two, "prince and patron " — Principem et patronum. — Maret, vol. i. p. 97. 2oo THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Maret quotes Cardinal de la Luzerne as saying that a General Council, in which the order of priests was not represented, would be iUegitimate though not invalid (vol. i. p. 125) ; and gives it as the general opinion of theologians that their presence was necessary. He also admits that the presence of laymen in the Councils is attested by a large number of documents. Von Schulte reviewed this work in the Literaturblat of Bonn (v. pp. 2 and 54). Looking at it in a popular sense, Schulte thought it was a book to mark an epoch. It was likely to pro duce a great effect among the clergy, little among the laity. Time has not justified this anticipation. The fact is, aU the younger clergy had been educated out of French ideas and sympathies, and such of the young laity too as had been brought up by priests. Men were but beginning to find how the Christian Brothers, and convent schools, and episcopal semin aries had changed France. The Civiltd, in reply, objects even to Maret's formula, the Pope with the bishops superior to himself alone. Such an objec tion implies that in Council all the bishops add to the Pope nothing at all. So many mitres without any heads in them would add at least as much. We believe, indeed, that great thinkers have doubted whether a judge with his wig is not superior to the same judge without his wig. But the Pope with all the bishops is not superior to the Pope without any bishop ! The Jesuit writer says that he thinks he expresses the mind of Maret with exactness when he puts it thus, The supreme power resides in the Pope together with the bishops ; in the Pope as supreme, whose strict duty it is nevertheless, to obey ; in the bishops as subordinate, who, nevertheless, have the right to com mand (Civiltd, VII. viii. p. 257 ff .). The choicest auditories of Paris had often crowded noble Notre Dame, quaffing with delight the sparkling eloquence of the Carmelite preacher Hyacinthe. Now the ear of the country was thriUed for a moment, by a cry from that eloquent voice. " By an abrupt change," he wrote to the General of his order on September 20, 1869, " for which I blame not your own feelings, but a party in Rome, you now accuse what you did A FORM OF MANICHEISM 201 encourage, and blame what you did approve, commanding me to hold a language, or to preserve a silence, which would not represent my conscience." Placed in this difficulty, he must forsake General, order, and convent. He continues : " My profound conviction is, that if France in particular, and the Latin races in general, are delivered over to social, moral, and religious anarchy, the principal cause is, not assuredly Catholicism itself, but the manner in which it has been understood and practised for a long time." x St. Peter's Day, always a great day in Rome, was, of course, of surpassing importance in the year of the Council. The Civiltd celebrated it in an article very like one of the Pope's Speeches. This article yields an example of a dualism in the government of the universe which must glide in as the unconscious but inevitable complement of the doctrine into which Papal writers fall, in explaining away what to others seems the blight of Providence on whatever they rule according to their own principles. They begin by separating the God of Providence from the God of grace. They end by turning the bounties of Providence into the bribes of the evU one. It wUl be seen that in what foUows national prosperity comes from the devil. The increase of our fields, the blessing in our basket and our store, are in reality a curse. This, though unseen to the poor Pope who teaches such things, presents a true and a very hurtful form of Manicheism. It is another proof that they who readily forge and hurl bad names are not safe from the errors which those names when correctly used denote. In June the Curia had to set up a strong resistance to the movement originated in Austria for the abrogation of the Con cordat. That instrument, which had formed the diplomatic triumph of Cardinal Rauscher and had crowned the professional reputation of Schulte, had legaUy restored to the Papal Church much of what it calls its liberties ; but the clergy complained that they never practically got all that was promised upon paper-. In the Frond biographies of the Cardinals, that of Rauscher 1 See the original, Vitelleschi, p. 266. 202 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE describes the condition of the Church in Austria, under the Josephine laws, as deplorable ! Instead of leaving her, like Protestant Prussia, to manage her own affairs, without having defined either what " manage " or " her own " meant, Austria, knowing how Rome interprets, had taken a different course. There was left, according to our authority, no canon law, but only such legislation as was imbued with Febronianism and Caesarism. Bulls, briefs, rescripts, and even the pastorals of bishops were subject to the royal placet. Marriage was with drawn from under the control of the Church. The State pushed into everything, " and the Catholic Church had none of the liberties claimed by the tolerance of the age for aU religions." Rauscher had succeeded in getting these grievances redressed, but now the national spirit was rising against his work. His Concordat bound Austria to concede to the Church " aU rights and privileges to which by the divine order and by canon law she is entitled." Probably the Emperor but imperfectly com prehended what that implied. Rauscher comprehended it. He was as honest a man as any Papal priest is likely to be. He was the adviser of the Emperor, and his sworn personal friend. Any one may tell what such friends do for princes who wiU only master what Rauscher managed to bind his sovereign to. The minister, Von Hasner, put the plea for the abrogation of the Concordat on ground exceedingly offensive to the Pope and those around him. When the Concordat was contracted, said Hasner, Rome was an independent State. Now, it has ceased to be so, and is sustained only by foreign arms. The reply from the Vatican was : So long as the Pope is sustained by Christian arms, he can never be sustained by those of foreigners. The reply of the politician would have been that in 1855, when the Concordat was concluded, the Papal State was as much dependent upon foreign arms as in 1867, the only difference being that at the former time the arms holding a great portion of it were those of Austria. !. On the anniversary of the Pope's accession, his speech, addressed to the Sacred CoUege, contained the foUowing pas sage : "The two societies of which the world consists, said his THE POPE'S MENACE 203 Holiness, are, first, the Tower of Pride, i.e. Babel ; secondly, the society whose prototype is seen " in the upper room, on the day of Pentecost, where Peter, the Apostles, and thousands of the faithful of different nations, heard one and the same lan guage and understood it." Those who wish to form a clear idea of what these two organs of two hostile societies are — the Babel tongue and the Pentecostal tongue — must just keep their eyes open as we go on. (Civiltd, VII. vii. p. 130.) The Pope, on June 25, caUing governments before " his tribunal," and sitting in judgment, pronounced censure on the governments of Italy, Austria, Spain, and Russia. Italy was discussing a law to subject students even for the priesthood to the conscription. Austria was miserably wronging and in juring the Church. Spain was doing likewise, or worse. And Russia was persecuting the Polish bishops and sending them into exUe. The high spirits of the Court at this moment appear in the comments on these sentences. We give a few specimens from the Civiltd (VII. vii. p. 135, etc.) — From no other hps could those words burst forth, save from those of him who is set by God as ruler of His Church, with divine power, above all human powers. . . . Only the Pope can thus menace, reprove, and instruct, because he only is set in a region above aU human greatness between heaven and earth. . . . When science gloried in being Catholic, and authority in being derived from God, both were, when they spoke, echoes of the word of the Pope. But science and authority have become unchristianized. The Pope has remained what he was — the herald, the oracle of the Lord. The article proceeded to show that the Pope had menaced in the same breath one republic, Spain ; two constitutional monarchies, Italy and Austria ; and one absolute monarchy, Russia. This could not be done unless the Pope was king. Then follows a specimen of history as it flourishes under Pius IX. The Roman Emperors used to imprison the Popes, in order to reign in Rome ; and Constantine, not wishing to imprison the Pope, abandoned Rome. But a king not Pope, and a Pope not king, never were able to live here together, and never wiU be able to do so. (Civiltd, VII. vii. p. 131 ff .) 204 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Great attention was awakened by the prominence given by the Civiltd (p. 210) to a publication of Bishop Plantier, of Nimes. It was " splendid and profound." Plantier spoke of the suggestion that the two doctrines of Papal infaUibUity and the assumption of the Virgin should be defined, by acclam ation. He alleged that such a mode of definition could be conveniently and infallibly adopted, and asked if the Council should adopt it, what would be the harm ? He ridiculed the idea that the assistance of the Holy Spirit would be given to a decision by vote and not to one by acclamation. The appear ance of this in the Civiltd, after all that had passed, quickened the fears of the anti-infaUibilists and also of the anti- opportunists lest the Pope should be determined to carry through the definition by acclamation. Early in September the bishops of Germany met at Fulda, and issued a coUective pastoral. They solemnly deprecated the rumours spread abroad as to the intentions of the Council. The bishops went on to asseverate that the Council would never define any new doctrine which was not contained in holy writ or in tradition, but would define only principles which were writ ten " on aU your hearts by faith and conscience " (Friedberg, p. 276). The Catholics of Germany took this solemn language in its apparent meaning ; and the persuasion that their bishops would stand fast, and that the Curia would not ride roughshod over such a body, tranquillized most men. Only ecclesiastics appear to have suspected that the assurance might amount to little more than carefuUy dovetailed words. The German bishops, in giving the assurance that nothing but what the faithful believed would be defined, probably hoped that the fact of their having to give such an assurance would weigh at Rome, as a hindrance to the plans in contemplation. If so, they only furnished one more proof of the truth which we in England have been told by Dr. Newman, that no pledge from Catholics is of any value to which Rome is not a party.1 If the German bishops read as little as Dr. Friedrich says they do, they perhaps do not read the Unitd Cattolica. There 1 Letter to the Duke of Norfolk, p. 14. > ?""*' MEETING OF CATHOLIC NOTABLES 205 is no doubt that it, at least, speaks language agreeable in the highest quarters. In its number for the preceding ist of May, it commented on the same assurance as hiving been flung before the French people. " If the CouncU," says this real echo, " should only define what aU believe, the CouncU would be useless, for in points which ah believe aU are agreed." To say, it proceeds, that an CEcumenical CouncU should express what all the faithful think, is to confound the Teaching Church with the Learning Church. " The pen faUs from our hands, and we have not courage to contend against such nonsense." After having put this assurance before their nation, certain of the bishops felt it necessary to address a private appeal to the Pope, drawn up by Dinkel, Bishop of Augsburg, repre senting the great danger to the Church in Germany which the proposed alterations would involve, and praying him to abandon " the far-reaching projects which were ascribed to him." x A similar appeal was sent to his Holiness by the prelates of Hungary, in which country a notable commencement had been made in restoring the laity to a part in the management of Church affairs.2 In June 1869 a remarkable meeting of Catholic notables was held in Berlin ; with an account of which Sepp opens his book. The chair was fiUed by Peter Reichensperger, since noted for his Ultramontane zeal, and Herr Windhorst, now the Ultra montane leader in the Reichstag, was present, with even Dr. Jorg, of Bavaria, whose aUusion, in the winter of 1874, to the attempt of Kullman on the life of Bismarck caUed forth a remarkable speech from that statesman. These gentlemen, thinking, or professing to think, that their bishops would defeat what the Curia had planned, adopted an address expressive of confidence in them, and of their hope that the threatened coUision between the Church and their governments and nation might be averted. Sepp himself went to Prague to present the document to Cardinal Prince Schwarzenberg. The latter read it slowly, thought it over, and said, " It is far too weak. With Rome 1 Friedberg, p. 19, 2 See Lord Acton, Zur Gesehichte. 206 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE you must hold very different language from that." In further conversation Sepp said to the Cardinal, " You have in Prague the first canonist in Germany (Schulte), the man who drafted the Austrian Concordat, and surely he can be employed in similar work for the Council." The reply was : " You have in Munich the greatest Catholic theologian in Germany, and the gentlemen in Rome wiU not hear of his being invited " (Sepp, p. 4). Large numbers of priests had been returned to the Bavarian Parliament, all burning with zeal against Prussia, and against union under it. In 1868 the clerical agitation had gone so far that, in November of that year, President Badhauser, when closing the Landsrath, addressed the members in unwonted language — When the government of the country and its organs, the chamber which represents the people, and the new laws, are daily held up to suspicion, mockery, and contempt, when the peasantry are excited against the townspeople, and when men, throwing off aU patriotic shame, feed themselves with hopes of foreign inter vention, threatening our German warriors with the chassepots, then must every honourable man condemn such proceedings ; for the venom daily instilled will, in time, poison the honest country people, as occurrences in Upper Bavaria already show.1 Secret associations for Ultramontane objects were formed even among children. Those of the clergy who would have warned the authorities were stiU kept stUl by secret terrorism. The meeting of the CouncU and the necessity of overthrowing Prince Hohenlohe were closely connected with this turmoU. And the Liberals plainly said, " The whole Catholic world is to be fanaticized, to enable the great Catholic powers, after crushing Prussia, as they hope to do, to carry out a grand reaction." 2 The Vaterland went so far, when Napoleon III took his last plebiscite, as to teU its readers that a French intervention in Germany would soon foUow, that it was eagerly looked for, and that aU would join France to break the hated yoke of Prussia. MoraUy, Prussia was already at an end, but it was for France 1 Weltbegebenheiten, 336, 2 Ibid, i, 327. STRUGGLE IN AUSTRIA 207 to put an end to her physicaUy. " Who can teU if we shall have any North German Confederation, ZoUverein, or Prussian monarchy in 1871 ? -* Similar hopes of great events often pointed to the year of the CouncU, or the year after. The Civiltd did not scruple to tell Napoleon III that he owed the new plebiscite to Mentana. So far from concealing the Pope's direct action in a question affecting the stability of a throne, his confidential writers exaggerated his influence. In Austria a struggle had set in against the supernatural order. Laws on civil marriage, education, and registry of bap tism were passed by the legislature, and tardily assented to by the Emperor. The Bishop of Linz issued a manifesto saying that he would not acknowledge the new illegitimate laws — of course under the plea of obeying God rather than man. Turning on the Emperor, he said that he had pledged his faith to the Concordat as a man and as a kaiser. Other prelates, in mUder language, set Papal above Austrian law. FinaUy, as as we have aheady seen, on June 22, 1868, the Pope himself laid the new laws under his condemnation. A Catholic meeting against the school law was being held in the church at Schlanders, and while the curate was making a speech Count Manzano, the local authority, declared the meeting closed. Cries of " Down with him ! kiU him ! " were raised. He was thrown to the ground, beaten on the breast, and barely escaped to the barracks of the gensdarmes. When the Council was closely approaching, great excite ment broke out in Austria against the religious orders. The spark which kindled the blaze was the discovery of a nun con fined in the Carmelite convent of Cracow. She had been kept in one ceU for twenty years, with incredible privations and in bestial filth. The rage of the public forced the government to go as far as some show of action. Orders were issued for the inspection of convents. Sentences of bishops condemning priests to confinement in ecclesiastical prisons were declared invalid unless the culprit voluntarily consented. The bishops were also required to give in lists of the voluntary prisoners, 1 Ibid. 340, 208 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE These measures were resented as an " insult to the episco pate." The Bishop of Briinn won himself an honourable mention in the Civiltd by a circular in which he repelled the pretensions of the government, refused the list required, and told the superiors of monasteries to pay no heed to the orders. While this second government was set up, beside that of the country, the voice of Rome cheered it on in taking the upper hand. The same voice railed against the constitutional minis ters, the parliament, and the laws. The combative Bishop of Linz, in a great meeting, said that he did not cast any doubt on the religious feeling of the Emperor, but he was now nothing more than a constitutional sovereign. Instead, therefore, of merely saying that they had confidence in the Emperor, they must come to his aid. This was repeated in Rome, with the explanation that it had been said that the bishop in this appeal for aid to the Emperor was only uttering the sentiments of his Majesty as expressed to the bishop. Thus were bishops commended by the organ of the Papal Court for breaking the laws of their country, and credited with influencing the mind of the sovereign in a sense hostfle to the constitution.1 The Ultramontane party had frequently, during the year (1868) been encouraged by correspondents in Paris to expect a war of France against Prussia. On March 10, the Unitd contained a letter expressing fears that Austria and Italy might agree to remain neutral, but quoting a passage from the Volksbote in favour of French invasion of Germany. On April 23 it was said that for a year past the Emperor had allowed no opportunity of rousing the war spirit to pass. A week later a crusading significance was given to the approaching anniversary of Joan of Arc. It was announced that more than twelve archbishops and bishops would attend — among them Cardinal Bonnechose — and that the Empress would grace the scene. On May 1 the fact that the appearance in Paris of Benedetti, the French ambassador at Berlin, was officially said to have no connection with political prospects, was noted for 1 Civiltd, VII. viii. pp. 209 ff , A THREEFOLD OPPOSITION 209 a smile. On the 13th the display at the festival of Joan of Arc at Orleans, with a great array of prelates, was described as " one of the noblest ever connected with war and religion, well adapted to excite a nation which aims at uniting the cross with the sword." On June 19 it was said that the mission of General Fleury to Florence was with reason taken as a sign of approaching war. Yet, while the Emperor of the French was looked to as leader against the foe whom the Church had marked out for the first victim, every sign of discord in France, every outbreak or dis order was eagerly paraded as proof of the anarchy to which all countries must come under any regime but that of the Church. At the same time every crime, riot, or difficulty in Italy was magnified and dwelt upon with the same moral. " Let the Chamber invoke the authority of the Council, and proclaim its canons as the laws of the State," was the demand of the Unitd eight months before the Council met (March 21). Another saying was, There are three Italys — the Italy of Pius IX, which prays ; the Italy of Mazzini, which conspires ; the Italy of Menabrea, which trembles (March 27). Mena- brea was then Premier. Again — The Council is drawing near, and Babylon is trembling, hell is blaspheming, and before long the world will hear the infallible word of truth and righteousness. Hallelujah ! . . . The revolu tion which for nine years has been bent on marching to Rome is disgraced, senseless, divided. The traitors are betrayed, the robbers plundered, and the rebels plotted against by rebellion. Hallelu jah ! (March 28). The Unitdiound that the threefold opposition of governments, rationalists, and heretics showed itself most strongly in May, the month of Mary, which only means that the Immaculate has set her heel on the three heads of the Hydra. Here the mention of governments as one head of the Hydra is no slip ofthe pen, that is, governments which dwelt in Babylon, as we have just read, or in the tower of Babel, as it is more frequently expressed. Three days later (May 23) the Unitd cries, " It is time for Catholics to be up in defence of the Council. It is the only vol. 1. J4 210 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE plank of safety for shipwrecked society." The Memoriale Diplomatique says that " governments are less and less disposed to interfere in religious questions, unless their rights are infringed ; but such reserve is war against the CouncU, which being infallible cannot infringe any right." The italics here are our own ; and would that we could print the words on the mind of every rising man in England. That would save vast waste of words.The courage of the Civiltd was stimulated by the French elections in the summer, and its hatred of United Italy boiled over. The ever faithful Univers had given the watchword to the electors, "The temporal power, and liberty of higher instruction ! " In the cry " liberty of higher instruction," we have the popular side of the original caU of the Civiltd for universities aU over Europe, canonically instituted. One hundred and twenty deputies were pledged to the program, and the French electors ought to be proclaimed as having deserved well of Catholicism. " The illustrious Louis Veufllot," as the Civiltd styles him, had shown that what the Voltairians wanted was the separation of Church and State, from which would follow the decay of Christian worship to such a point that it might be feasible to annihilate it. Noble, Catholic, chivalrous France is contrasted, by the Civiltd, with vUe Italy. The latter, in a serious catalogue of crimes, is said to have " reduced the bishops to the extreme of poverty, has at its own caprice impeded the divine word, and showed more than sixty dioceses widowed of their pastors." The French voters had said, " We go to the urn as the delegates of the universal suffrage of Christendom." " The monstrous edifice of Italian unity must crumble," says this Romanist, who was no Roman. It is founded on the ruins of the temporal power of the Pontiff, which cannot perish. (VII. vi. 611 ff.) The plea of the Liberal Catholics for freedom of conscience became more and more offensive to the Catholics. The Fathers of Laach, in censuring the address of the laymen of Coblentz, went so far as to say that the treatment of the Jews in Rome " showed no want of humanity or civil tolerance." These edu- IDEA OF SUBMISSION ILLUSORY 211 cated laymen well knew that the proper condition of heretics, according to the same principles, ought to be much worse than that of the Ghetto Jews. The latter, not being baptized, were theoreticaUy not subject to the jurisdiction of the Church, but the others, as BeUarmine shows, though not of the Church, belonged to the Church. Stumpf , writing in the Bonn Literatur blatt, did not content himself with questioning the intolerant doctrine of the Jesuits ; he directly attacked it. He took an important step further — one, indeed, which seems like a new life in the Roman Catholic intellect. He told the Jesuits plainly that their exclusive principle of one fold rendered religious free dom and unity impossible. Here he touched the distinction between the grand and the huge, which Romanists carefully keep out of sight, and which the sincerest advocates of liberty in their ranks had hitherto overlooked. They took for a grand conception of the unity of Christians, as consisting in sub mission to one human head. That conception is narrow and iUusory. It faUs of grandeur by monstrous disproportion. Stumpf goes on to declare that the absolute dominion of the Church over the State, although the favourite doctrine as he admits, in Rome, is in contradiction to the fundamental principle of Christianity. He would no longer be content, as a Liberal Catholic, to plead for freedom of conscience merely as a com promise. He says, We now represent a principle. The theo cratic principle menaces society, and that principle will never be satisfied till the acknowledgment of civU rights is made to depend upon the profession of the Catholic faith. He adds that a promise to compromise till we had the power would con tent no one, because the modern world has learned that nothing is settled till the principle is settled. He says, We are determined to have the Church a Church, and the State a State. But this a postulate which rJemands, as its condition, individual freedom. According to him it was Christ that introduced among men the idea of independence, and that of a limit existing to the power of the State, by distinguishing His own kingdom of love and grace from that of law and compul sion. "When the Church authorities," says Stumpf, "do 212 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE admonish the rulers of the State, their first counsel should be to consider it their highest duty to protect freedom of conscience. They ought to warn them, before any other kind of unrighteous ness against the use of force, for or against any form of religion which is not inconsistent with the maintenance of moral law " ; and he adds, what we shaU emphasize, " privation of civil equal ity is an employment of force." Such, he says, was the counsel given by the early Christian teachers ; and though later teachers reversed it, their course is not to be justified before the law of Christ. The end of the State, as viewed by Stumpf, is much loftier than that assigned to it in the Papal theory. In the great collection of families caUed by men a State, he does not see a body politic without a moral mission, existing, according to the ruinous theology of Rome, only for temporal ends — a body politic which would be unworthy of God or man. Accord ing to Stumpf, the end of the State is the maintenance of general moral order. This theory does not bind the famUies of a country acting in their coUective capacity, to prescribe the creed and cult of individuals. No more does it bind them, on the other hand, to resign all moral aims, leaving every moral question to be decided for them without any appeal to the common conscience, to fruits or to the Bible, by a power which would strip the State of every moral quality, and would also prescribe the creed and cult of all. The theory of Stumpf holds that the coUective authority of the nation, in the affairs common to aU the families of that nation, is called to regulate action so far as action affects the common good, but does not hold that it is caUed to regulate belief. Claiming for the Church the full right of asserting and urging moral principles, Stumpf, with great solemnity, claims for the legislator freedom to frame law according to his own conscience, and to his belief in what tends to the maintenance and the perfecting of moral order. This he has to do without the direction of any ecclesiastic, but knowing that he must give account to God. No omnipotent word of Church authori ties can or shall deter us from this work. Then he interjects, Would it not be pleasant to have to consult the theologians JESUITS AND THE SCRIPTURES 213 of the Civiltd and the Stimmen ? The Jesuits, he aUeges, had no conception of any exercise of moral power upon one another but in the way of commanding and obeying. The Church in the middle ages, by her influence in secular affairs secularized her self, and lost her moral influence, which was never recovered to Christianity tfll the States had done what the Jesuits caU apostatizing from Christ, and so opened the way for a return of true moral Christian influence. The early Church, he truly and nobly points out, was able, in the face of the omnipotent heathen authorities, to pervade society with her true moral influences ; and he contends that nothing can give back to the Church her position as the first force in culture, but the recog nition of the independence of the State. One very curious part of this grave and forceful essay is the protest of the layman against the twisting of Scripture by the Jesuits. He puts together a number of the texts upon which they ring the changes, making them prove their own ideas by the simple process of putting those ideas into them, and reiter ating them again and again. The first of the texts which he quotes is, " Teach aU nations." He, apparently, is not aware that this is now as handy a weapon with those theologians as " obey God rather than man." In their lips " teach " means " make laws," and " aU nations " means, not every creature, but, coUectively, aU States. Therefore the words " teach all nations " are, in the lips of the Jesuits, a commission to the Pope to give laws to aU countries, or, in highflown language, " to exercise the supreme magisterial office." The Jesuits had saucfly told the laymen of Coblentz to ask the nearest theologian for an explanation of the relations between the natural order and the supernatural. But this particular layman gave them as good as they brought. When men write as he does, they have begun to be Catholics, have ceased to be Papists, and are, how ever unconsciously, in process of ceasing to be Romanists. The AUocution of June 22, in which the constitution and new laws of Austria were condemned, had proved as distasteful to Liberal Catholics as it had been agreeable to the Jesuits. 214 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE " The Curialistic notion," says the author of Reform in Head and Members, " that the law of the Church must be the in violable rule for aU laws and statutes, and for aU and every kind of activity in the life of the State, runs through it like a black thread. The Austrian Magna Charta of civil, political, religious and scientific freedom was caUed a sacrilegious law. More over, the Pope," he proceeds to say, " had declared that these laws themselves, together with all that should arise out of them, are and ever wUl be invalid and of no effect. . . . Every enlightened person among the Catholics of Germany and France concealed himself in sUence and in mourning at this rude opposition of Rome to the public law of the entire Western world." Count Beust, in a despatch dated about ten days after the Allocution was delivered, said that " the Holy See had extended its animadversions to subjects ' which we by no means can allow to be under its authority.' " We shaU hereafter see how clearly and completely Count Beust had now grasped the question as between the Papacy and the life of nations. CHAPTER X Conflicting Manifestoes by Bishops — Attacks on Bossuet— Darboy — Dupanloup combats Infallibility — His relations with Dr. Pusey— Deschamps replies — Manning's Manifesto — Retort of Friedrich— Discordant Episcopal Witnesses IN November 1869 the Bishop of VersaiUes, writing of Bossuet, said that the fame of the Eagle of Meaux was from day to day declining (Friedberg, p. 81). This was but a symptom of the new war against nationalism. Professor Ceccucci, though writing for a French audience, did not scruple to say, " If Bossuet escaped excommunication, he owed it to the benign and paternal indulgence of the Holy See " (Frond, iv. p. 112). Bishop Dupanloup soon took occasion to show that Innocent XI sent Bossuet two briefs congratulating him on having written in a manner calculated to win back heretics and increase the propagating power of the Church.1 If the Church, even before infallibility had been proclaimed, began to be so con scious of its narrowness that it could hardly contain Bossuet, what wiU it be when a few centuries more have passed over it ? As the opening of the CouncU drew nearer, feeling grew warmer in political and religious circles. Archbishop Darboy sketched the impending dangers in a pastoral — You have been told that articles of faith which hitherto you have not been bound to believe, are to be imposed upon you ; that points affecting civil society and the relations of Church and State are to be treated in a sphit opposed to the laws and usages of the age ; that a certain vote is to be carried by acclamation ; that the bishops will not be free, and that the minority, even if eloquent, will be treated as an opposition, and will soon be put down by the majority. ... It must be owned that much has been done to spread these alarms by writers taking different sides." : Bishop Dupanloup, when about leaving home for the Council, 1 Letter as printed in Otto Mesi, p. 413, and now (but also in French) in Eight Months at Rome, p. 277. 3 Friedberg, p. 287. 216 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE published a memorable letter. He seemed to regard the desire of the French clergy for centralization as the origin of the cry for a dogma. The change, however, from a national to a Papal spirit was natural. Was it likely that youths from the schools of the Christian Brothers, passed through an episcopal semin ary, would comprehend the national spirit and episcopal con victions of Darboy or even of Dupanloup ? ** The lower educa tion of the country had been just long enough in the hands of Rome to begin to bear fruit . Dupanloup meant no iU to France when he succeeded in binding Louis PhUippe to Gregory XVI, by inducing him to give the priests their way in schools, in return for forbearance in baptizing the Comte de Paris, as the son of a mixed marriage, and of a mother who refused to abjure her Protestantism. But he then did one of the most hurtful deeds to France, and to the future of European pea "e, that man could have done. This letter, cries Sambin, gave an episcopal head to the revolt ; . . . the objection was pointed against the opportuneness of defining the dogma of infallibility, but it was hardly possible to be deceived — the principle of infaUibUity itself seemed to be attacked. . . . The acts of the sovereign Pontiff were presented in a light so far from the truth, that a feeling of profound astonish ment passed through the ranks of pastors and people. They were grieved to see the paling away of the triple halo which had hitherto hovered around the author's brow (Sambin, p. 49). This was published in France in 1872, after Dupanloup had " submitted," and rendered new and conspicuous service to the Papacy. As Dupanloup's pamphlet wiU be hard to find here after, and as it is a representative document, we may give a general idea of the argument it presents. 1 The author of Reform in Head and Members says (p. 156) : " The theological lecture-rooms of the Sorbonne are empty, and the fame and splendour of France in theological science, in which she once took so high a place, have been extinguished, since the clergy began to receive their education — that is, as much education as was indispensable — in the smaller episcopal seminaries, and their theological training in the greater ones. There is no theological science at all in France now." He supports this broad assertion by details gived by Bouix, a well- known Ultramontane writer. DUPANLOUP'S MANIFESTO 217 For two years, says Dupanloup, thousands of printed papers have been circulated in the streets, containing a vow to believe in the personal infaUibUity of the Pope. Agents have got them signed by persons who did not understand the first word of the question. He contrasts the confidence and freedom of speech granted to the Civiltd and the Univers with the secrecy observed toward bishops. Naming Manning and Deschamps as the leaders in the agitation for the new dogma, he adds, " I say new, because for eighteen hundred years the faithful have not, on pain of ceasing to be Catholics, been bound to believe it." AUuding to the freedom which, it was said, the bishops would have in the CouncU, he asks what freedom was left to them even now, when any who expressed an unwelcome opinion were de nounced in the papers, beforehand, as schismatics or heretics. ..." After having taught for eighteen hundred and seventy years, the Church is now to come and ask in a Council, Who has the right of teaching with infallibility ? . . . When the oak is twenty centuries old, digging to find the parent acorn under the roots is the way to shake the tree." The Bishop proceeds, with tact and great earnestness, to plead for the necessity of moral unanimity in defining new dogmas. He relates a fact of interest, and one very closely affecting the person of Pius IX. We have seen that, in 1864, the Pope formaUy initiated official preparations for the CouncU ; that he had long before 1867 decided important questions as to its con stitution and procedure; that he had set commissions to work, consulted bishops in different countries, and ordered nuncios to select theologians ; and that it was only political perplexity which prevented the assembly of 1867 from being the General CouncU. Yet Bishop Dupanloup, whether then aware of these facts or not, makes the following statement — I well remember, and more bishops than one who were present in Rome in 1867 can recaU, the fact that one of the most serious anxieties of Pius IX, before deciding on holding the Vatican Council, was, lest questions should arise calculated to provoke stormy 218 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE discussions, and divisions in the episcopate. But the Pope remem bered the sagacious conduct of the Council of Trent and of Pius IV, and proceeded, in the hope that it would not be forgotten at the future Council. One of Dupanloup's solemn sayings is, " I have read and read again the catechism of the Council of Trent, on pur pose to find if it spoke Yes or No about the infaUibUity of the Pope ; I have ascertained that it does not say a word about it." Again, he states that in 1867 one hundred and eighty-eight Anglican ministers wrote to the Pope asking for the basis of a union. In his reply, the Pope spoke of the authority of the Church and the supremacy of the Pope, but he did not speak of his infaUibUity. Yet journalists, screening themselves behind his name, tried to shut the mouths of bishops by attacks fuU of violence and gaU. This was meant for M. Veuillot, who was not slow to reply. As to Greeks and Protestants, Dupanloup points out that what is proposed amounts to telling them, " A ditch now separates us ; we are going to make it an abyss. . . . Two years ago, Dr. Pusey said to me in Orleans, ' There are eight thousand of us in England, daUy praying for a union.' "... When Pitt thought of relaxing laws against Catholics in Eng land and Ireland, he asked several learned bodies what was the real doctrine of the Roman Church on the power of the Pope. " I have under my eyes the replies of the Universities of Paris, Douay, Louvain, Alcala, Salamanca, and VaUadolid." They all " answer expressly that neither the Pope nor the Cardinals, nor yet any body or individual in the Roman Church, hold from Jesus Christ any civU authority over England, any power to release the subjects of his Britannic Majesty from theh oath of fidelity." Such doctrine was calculated to reassure Pitt, as against the contrary doctrine, professed in celebrated BuUs by more Popes than one. But what if the Pope be declared in faUible ? As to Catholic governments, their standing jealousy of the ecclesiastical power would be increased. Had not Boniface DUPANLOUP'S MANIFESTO 219 VIII taught that the temporal sword also belonged to Peter, and that the spiritual power had a right to institute and judge the temporal ? Had not Paul III released aU the subjects of Henry VIII from their oath of aUegiance, offered England to any one who would conquer it, and given all the goods of the dissident English, real and personal, to the conqueror ? Was not that Bull a great misfortune to Christendom ? "Iam sad — and who would not be sad ? — in recaUing these great and painful historical facts ; but they force us to it — those whose levity and rashness have stirred these burning questions." After the dogma shaU have been proclaimed, he contends that from the point of view occupied by governments, " all civil and political rights, like aU religious belief, will be in the hand of a single man." The journals which claim to be purest in their Romanism " treat the doctrine, so strongly held by the Catholic sovereigns, as well as others, that each of the two powers is independent in its own sphere, as tainted with atheism." The foUowing passage in the Bishop's argument suffices to show that there may be more senses of the statement that Catholics do not owe any divided aUegiance, than plain English folk ever dreamed of in theh philosophy — We lately read, as quoted with praise in a French paper, the following, which compares those to the Manicheans who deny that the two swords are in the same hand : " Are there two sources of authority and power, two supreme ends for the members of the same society, two different objects in the intention of the Being who orders aU and two distinct destinies in one and the same man, who is both member of a Church and of a State ? Who does not see the absur dity of such a system ? It is the dualism of the Manicheans if not atheism." We ought to interject the remark that " the two swords in the same hand " is not strict but popular language. The two are in the same power, but only one is in the spiritual hand. Again, the taunt of Manicheism frequently falls from Jesuit pens. Boniface VIII set the example of caUing people something like Manicheans, if they believed in any supreme power in princes on a level with that of the Pope. Coming to the crucial question, What is speaking ex cathedra ? 220 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Bishop Dupanloup shows that the diversity of doctrine on this point is almost endless, and perplexing beyond belief. The lay Professor of Theology in the seminary of the Archdiocese of Westminster, Dr. Ward, formerly an Anglican minister, goes beyond the great majority. They hold that a condition neces sary to an infallible utterance is that the Pope shaU address the whole Church, but Dr. Ward thinks that this is not necessary. The majority think that the intention of binding the belief of the faithful must be clearly expressed, but Dr. Ward again thinks that it need not be so. PhiUips, the German doctor, holds that the Pope need not consult a CouncU, the Roman Church, the Cardinals, or any one ; nor is it necessary that he should maturely deliberate or carefuUy study the matter by the light of God's written word and of tradition, or even that he should put up a prayer to God before pronouncing sentence. '' Without any one of these conditions," says the Bishop, " his decision would not be less valid, authentic, or obligatory on the whole Church, than if he had observed every condition dictated by faith, piety, and good sense." He adds the words of PhUlips, that the definition ex cathedra may be verbal or written and with or without anathema, but must be given by him to aU believing Christians as Vicar of Jesus Christ, in the name of the Apostles Peter and Paul, or in virtue of the authority of the Holy See, or in other simUar terms. The Church, he says, according to PhiUips, has no right to fix any condition or restric tion whatever. Citing the cases of Popes Stephen VI, Honor ius, and Pascal II, Dupanloup shows that heavy facts obstruct the historical path to the new dogma. He proceeds to point out that the difference between the universal infaUibilists and the dogmatical infallibUists is very grave. The former argue that the dogma, if adopted in the sense of the latter, would involve a perU. A Pope infaUible in some cases and faUible in others is, they think, a contradiction. If, as a private teacher, the Pope should err in doctrine, might he not impose his error on the Church ? If this is not possible, you have either a Pope who thinks one thing and defines another, or DUPANLOUP'S MANIFESTO 221 a perpetual miracle ! And why distinguish, ask the universal infallibUists, when Christ has not distinguished ? " That thy faith fail not " — that means the faith of Peter in every sense, personal and pastoral. These theologians contend that a Pope could not, even if he would, faU into an error, public or private. As to the effect of the change on the episcopate, Dupanloup contends that CouncUs will be rendered superfluous. Hitherto, the bishops have been judges of the faith, real judges, though in union with the Pope — co-judges, as was said by Benedict XIV. But if the proposed change is made, their judgment before or after will be of little account ; as Monsignor Manning has said, the Pope can determine " without the episcopate, and independently of it." The bishops, he proceeds, are now Doctors, not mere echoes. With the Pope they constitute the Teaching Church. After the change they will not be a voice, only an echo. Drawing a glowing picture of the services of the French bishops to the Papacy, he says — " Ah ! I dare to affirm that so much devotion to Rome and to the Catholic world gives to the Church of France the right to be trusted, to be heard." He adds, anticipating his arrival in Rome, " I shall no sooner touch the sacred ground, no sooner kiss the tomb of the Apostles, than I shall feel myself in peace, out of the battle, in the midst of an assembly presided over by a father and composed of brethren. There the noises will all die away, the rash inter ferences will cease, the indiscretions will disappear, the winds and waves will be calmed down." The statement, frequently repeated, that Bishop Dupanloup in this letter admitted the doctrine, and contested only the opportuneness of defining it, is incorrect. This was pointed out at the time by Dr. Reusch, of Bonn, in the Literaturblatt . Dupanloup once or twice says that he wUl not touch the ques tion of its truth, one way or the other. He never, directly or indirectly, indicates belief in it. Many of his arguments more than indirectly oppose the very substance of the doctrine. He plainly feels that it is unscriptural, uncatholic, and un wise ; but he knows that it is and has long been gospel in Rome. 222 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Bishop Dupanloup was replied to by Archbishop Deschamps, of Malines. Monsignor Deschamps was foUowing the straight path to the purple. He roundly lectured Dupanloup. " Why should not that trouble me which rejoices the enemies of the faith and of the Church ? " " You have committed an error, Monsignor," he says, repeatedly. He correctly states that Dupanloup has not confined himself to the question of oppor tuneness. " You have handled the principal question, . . . your fears have disturbed your vision." * Dupanloup prepared a rejoinder to Deschamps, but was prevented from publishing it by circumstances which taught him that in leaving France for Rome he had not passed from disturbance to tranquiUity, but from regulated conflict to all-triumphant violence, com pelling inaction, unless action was on its own side. In Rome, where any movement of an ecclesiastic is often accounted for by the prospect of some ribbon, robe, or perquisite, it was freely said that Napoleon had promised Dupanloup the arch bishopric of Lyons if he would head the Gallicans. An English paper repeated this Roman scandal, fathering it on weU informed circles. Certain circles are always well informed as to the motives of men who oppose them. The pastoral from the banks of the Thames forms a contrast to that from the banks of the Loire. True, Archbishop Man ning no longer speaks of the extinction of Protestantism, or the restoration of the Pope's dominion over the East, as prob able effects of the Council. He even shows some dawning consciousness that the war which he had announced in 1867 with a light heart, would not be carried through so lightly. In the earher part of his treatise he more than once cooUy speaks of the bishops as being unanimous in the belief of Papal infaUibility ! Before the conclusion, Bishop Maret's work extorts the admission that he must now caU that doctrine Ultramontane, which two years before, he had asserted to be Catholic. He none the less eagerly presses for the carrying out of the programme. The Church is far too large. She permits differences of belief, which are not only unseemly, but 1 Stimmen, N. F., vi. p. 57. MANNING'S MANIFESTO 223 dangerous. After an outbreak of questioning thought and conflicting will, such as had been occasioned by a simple demand for only one or two new dogmas, tighter and tighter binding up seems to Dr. Manning to be not merely becoming, but even necessary. WhUe panting for additional fetters for his own Church, he speaks of Protestants as sighing for something beyond insular narrowness. In fact, it would seem as if he had no perception of the difference between a big sect and a large creed, or of the possible harmony between a local organization and a universal brotherhood. There is no insular narrowness, much less Pontine-Marsh narrowness, in the definition of a Church given by the English Church, whereby she marks her relation to all other Churches. That definition is large, catholic, and scrip tural." ¦ It leaves the English Churchman free from any obliga tion to unchurch other Christians, and therefore he may rest and be thankful, when others feel bound, by the narrowness of their sect, to unchurch him. The Church of Christ was catholic when she could number only one hundred and thirty adherents in the whole world. She will never become more catholic than she was then. No sect can increase its catholicity by adding mUlions of ignorant and bigoted people, and caUing them Christians. Dr. Manning resented, as a sort of rebeUion, objections taken against multiplying terms of membership, and adding new conditions of salvation. To him every increase of narrowness seemed an increase of unity. If there are men in the English Church sighing in a similar way for bonds and anathemas which, thank God ! our island does not forge, they are not the men inspired by the catholic creed of their own Church, but men infected by the municipal creed of the Popes. Like Dupanloup, Archbishop Manning made an attack and provoked a retort. He denounced the historical school of theologians in Germany, and especiaUy in Munich, and was pitilessly cut up by Friedrich, in the Literaturblatt. The Archbishop, like Auguste Comte, had reached a point in the development of theory when it was necessary that it should 224 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE conquer history. Preparatory to the attack on the Catholic Faculty of Munich, he writes in mother English matter like the foUowing (p. io) : " The day is past for appeals to antiquity. If Christianity and the Christian Scriptures are to be maintained in controversy against sceptical criticism, the unbroken, world wide witness of the Catholic Church must be invoked." A number of equally exposed positions are taken up in face of the Liberal Catholic scholars, and that with all the contempt which official power often feels for reasoning power — " They who, under the pretensions of historical criticism, deny the witness of the Catholic Church to be the maximum of evidence, even in a historical sense, likewise ruin the foundation of moral certainty in respect to Christianity altogether " (p. 125). " No historical certainty can be called science except only by courtesy. It is time that the pretensions of ' historical science ' and ' scientific historians ' be reduced to their proper sphere and limits. And this the Council will do, not by contention or anathema, but by the words ' It hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us ' " (id.). However confused in his ideas of catholicity and of historical authority the Archbishop had become, the struggle he had done something to occasion and to exasperate already began to awake him to the difference between an ordinary addition to the creed and that change of base which he was moving heaven and earth to procure — There is a difference, also, between a definition of the infalli bility of the Pope and that of any other Christian doctrine. In the latter case the authority of the Church may be sufficient to overcome any doubt. In the former it is this very authority, the principle and foundation of all certainty in faith, which is in question (p. 31). These portentous words tell where Dr. Manning had placed himself — in pupilage to a power which, having left the divine " fountain of all certainty in faith," was disputing as to what cistern, of all the cisterns it had hewn out, was the one into which the true spring overflowed. Where will the dogma be found to conquer the history made by the Archbishop's own hand when he wrote those words — history proving that after he had been for years flourishing before Anglicans his Papal Society as affording absolute, certainty in faith, he himself MANNING'S MANIFESTO 225 declared her to be in the throes of a combat as to " the principle and fountain of all certainty in faith " ? Where wUl a dogma be found to conquer the history made at the moment when his Papal Society, in accordance with his wishes, adopted an unchangeable decree, which, if true, proves that for aU the time of her existence, she had not only been fallible, but had indeed failed, and that right grievously — faUed as to the doctrine of her head, by withholding from him the recogni tion of his attributes and rights ? If from the beginning the Popes were infallible, the Church, which never consented to recognize them as such till 1870, had up to that year failed in the doctrine of her head, and failed in opposition to her head. If they were not from the beginning infallible, she in 1870 failed in the doctrine of her head, and failed in con junction with her head. The decree of 1870 fixes her in the fork, and out of it she cannot wrestle : if the decree was true she had been in a fault of faith up to that day ; if it was not true, she committed that day a fault in faith. Archbishop Manning did not fail to hold out once more a warning to the governments. For some months past the tone of the Vatican Press had been that of men who felt that they now held the internal peace of many a nation at their mercy ; being able to menace almost any government with serious unrest, and some with overthrow. The habit of insinuating such threats seems to be native to the bad air which Dr. Newman truly speaks of as hanging around the foot of the Pope's rock.1 But the following is too close a copy of those revolutionary vaticinations for the banks of the Thames — The Catholic Church now stands alone, as in the beginning, in its divine isolation and power. " Be wise now therefore, O ye kings ; be instructed, ye judges of the earth." There is an abyss before you, into which thrones, and rights, and laws, and liberties may sink together. You have to choose between the Revolution and the Church of God. As you choose, so will your lot be. The General Council gives to the world one more witness for the truths, laws, and sanctities which include all that is pure, noble, just, venerable upon earth. It wUl be an evil day for any State m Europe 1 Letter to (he Puke* of Norfolk, VOL. J, J5 226 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE if it engage in conflict with the Church of God. No weapon formed against it ever yet has prospered (p. 130). The last words might be enough to account for Cardinal Manning's dislike of history. They flatly contradict it, and it flatly contradicts them ; for by the Church of God is here meant the Church of the Pope. The weapons which have most prospered from the days of the Reformation to this day are those that have been turned against the Pope. The nations that have most prospered have been those that have declared him a pretender ; and in these nations the reigns that have been distinguished for prosperity have been the most decidedly Protestant. England was long ago put to the choice between the Reformation and the Church ofthe Pope, and happily chose the good part, and as she chose, so, ever blessed be the God of nations, has been our lot. We wiU repeat the choice of our fathers, and the lot of our chUdren shaU be better and better. And they wUl have to pity, even more than we are caUed to pity, those who, having rejected reformation, have placed themselves under a continual terror and a liabUity to a periodical outburst of revolution. Friedrich, in the Literaturblatt (v. p. 164), replied to the attack on the historical theologians of Munich. He said that the abuses of the middle ages had crept in through the total neglect of history. On the other hand, Protestant theology had risen up and had matured as a strictly historical theology. Baronius had attempted to win this weapon back to the service of Rome, and the Munich scholars had foUowed in his steps. If archives and original works were to be wrested out of their hands, it meant nothing more nor less than laying down theh arms in the presence of their antagonists. Friedrich would not aUow the ambiguous expression "the witness of the Church " to cover anything more than her infaUible utterances. He said that the Archbishop had a false idea ofthe way in which a CouncU should proceed, because he seemed to think that the Church might speak without first using aU human means to ascertain the truth. If he thought so, he was under a delusion of which a careful study of the history of the CouncUs FRIEDRICH'S RETORT 227 might cure him. The statement of Manning, " I have already said," that the proofs of Papal infaUibUity outweighed those of the infallibility of the Church without the Pope, provoked the remark that as the Archbishop had adduced only his own authority, " I have already said." we might stfll doubt the infallibility of the proofs until he had produced his credentials as one inspired. Friedrich says that whfle blaming others for attempting to influence the Council, Manning himself tried to impose his authority upon it, in such a manner that it might be fancied that the Council was not to utter the words of the Holy Ghost, but those of the Archbishop of Westminster. Thus he indignantly flings back in the face of the prelate the assertion that it was an attempt to interfere with the freedom of the CouncU when the Theological Faculty of Munich gave an opinion to the king of the country in answer to ques tions put by him. The Archbishop, he protests, has no title to deprive theologians of their caUing, or of theh right to inves tigate historical evidences or to give their views, so long as the Church has not spoken. He reminds the Archbishop that, severe as he is against those who do not go as far as himself, even he does not go far enough, for his aUies now begin to require people to say, that the Church may define dogmas without having any support in the Bible and tradition, and that indeed when nothing but apocryphal documents are in favour of the definition. And, moreover, that the authority of a General Council (as distinguished from that of the Pope) is only human authority. These innovations, says the sturdy German, we abhor ; and then he leaves the Englishman to the care of his Jesuit allies with these words : " If what everybody here says " (he writes in Rome) " is true, that the Archbishop, at every opportunity, declares we have only one school to fear, the historical school, I grant to him and grant to his aUies that they have the light of history to fear." With various feelings the bishops now set forth to bear witness as to the faith of their respective Churches. This was the most dignified of the professed duties of a bishop in CouncUs 228 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE as they used to be. It had some show of a foundation so long as the rule of " apostolic " tradition was adhered to. Of course, however, that became antiquated. So " ecclesiastical " tradi tion was set up side by side with apostolic, as what was so caUed had been set up side by side with the Word of God. Darboy set out, from his diocese of two miUions of souls, to bear witness that the doctrine of Papal infallibility was not the faith, and never had been, on the banks of the Seine. Manning set out to testify that it was the faith and the tradition on the banks of the Thames. Clifford set out from Clifton to declare that it was not the faith on the Avon. Deschamps went to prove that it was the faith in Malines. Dupanloup went to prove that it was not, and never had been, the faith in Orleans. Cullen left Dublin to demonstrate that it was, and ever had been, the true faith of Ireland. MacHale left Connaught, bracing up his fourscore years, to go and bear witness that it was not the faith he had learned, no, nor any of his coevals. Spalding embarked from Baltimore to testify that it was the ancient faith in America. Kenrick set forth from St. Louis to protest that this was the reverse of the truth, and to prove that he had never been taught it in Maynooth, and even to teU of the first time when the doctrine was broached within the walls of that coUege. Rauscher left Vienna and Schwarzenberg Prague ; Haynald left Hungary and Strossmayer Croatia ; Von Scherr left Munich, Melchers Cologne, and Forster Breslau, to testify that the faith and tradition of their Churches had not ignored, but had withstood, the new doctrine. They had to add that the conscience of the people was so set against it that it was as much as the authority of the Church was worth to attempt to impose it upon them. Von Ketteler left Mainz to testify loudly, but with so uncertain a sound that no ordinary man could " know what was piped or harped." On the other hand, the bishops of Spain, Italy, and South America almost unanimously saUied forth to testify that in their Churches the new dogma was an old doctrine. Their testimony was reinforced by some from more ancient sees. Hassun set out from New Rome, as the Orientals call CONFLICTING TRADITION OF BISHOPS 229 Constantinople, to bear witness, as Patriarch of CUicia, that the City of Paul, and the'Churches planted by him, had always held the faith and tradition of Papal infaUibUity. Valerga turned his back on the Mount of Olives, onSion, and on Bethlehem, to give evidence, in the sight of God and man, that the Church of Jerusalem had always held the faith, and ^conserved the tra dition, that the Roman Pontiff was infaUible and his decrees irreformable. Darboy, in his fareweU pastoral, said to the Catholics of Paris, " In these matters, bishops are witnesses who prove, not. authors who invent." Had the contest lain between these two forces, the weight of talent, character, and supporting Churches would have decided it in favour of the status quo. But bishops sailed from Jaffna in Ceylon, and Jaro in the PhUippines, from India, China, and Siam, from Swan River and New Caledonia, to swamp with their traditions those of Bishops from Churches which might pretend to have a tradition. The fact that theirs could not set up any such claim was one objection urged against their votes, another being that they were dependent on the Propaganda. With these came also a number of Oriental bishops, in the same financial position, of whom ViteUeschi says that they brought the finest wardrobes and the steadiest votes. In aid of these a thick growth of bishops in partibus sprang out of the weU- warmed conserves of Court patronage. Roughly stated, the result was, that out of Italy and Spain old and educated Churches, when represented by prelates trained in their own bosom, generally declared in opposition to the new dogma. Where they did otherwise, they were often represented by prelates trained in Rome, and, like Cullen and Manning, speciaUy selected to imbue the National Church with the municipal theology of Rome, and, in case of need, to impose it upon the clergy. Those from reaUy ancient cities, like Jerusalem, who supported the Curia, were dependents of the Propaganda. With these came the occupants of sees created by Pius IX, most of wliich, from Westminster to Oceania, were represented by witnesses in favour of infaUibUity. 230 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Many of the bishops had for traveUing companion a small pamphlet. It was caUed Considerations (Erwagungen), and put the case against Papal infaUibUity in a form and compass seldom equalled, in any composition, for clearness, depth, fulness, and compression. It was no secret that the author was DoUinger, but he had not chosen to put his name on the title. In this manner was prepared for the world a drama of many scenes, which has left permanently in the eye of history four great spectacles — (i) How an ancient aristocracy, daiming to be the senate of humanity, was made the instrument of destroying its own legislative rights ; (2) How masters of ceremony, habituated to employ it for both political and religious ends, were made its victims, ceremony being brought into operation to carry away surreptitiously their constitu tional forms, and with them their legal privileges ; (3) How they who had declared " ecclesiastical " tradition to be as good a foundation for doctrine as the Word of God, went through the process of building on the sand ; (4) How a Head of the human species, a King of kings and Lord of lords, was erected by priests, and humfliated by Providence. CHAPTER XI Diplomatic Feeling and Fencing in Rome, November 1869 — Cross Policies on Separation of Church and State — Ollivier, Favre, De Banneville — Doctrines of French Statesmen ridiculed at Rome — Specimens of the Utterances approved at Court— Forecasts of War between France and Prussia — Growing Strength of the Move ment in France for Universities Canonically Instituted THOSE who arrived in the autumn months in Rome, perhaps with the hope of preventing the dreaded pro posals from being brought forward, or with the intention, if they could not succeed in that, of organizing an opposition to them, found to their surprise that the tone of the Curia was very gentle. The Cardinals and Monsignori, for their part, really did not care about infaUibUity. Indeed, the sub j ect might have been passed over in sUence had not such false rumours as to the designs of Rome been set afloat. Lord Acton names Cardinals AntoneUi, Berardi, and De Luca, and also Bishop Fessler, the Secretary of the Council, as declaring that the utterances of the Civiltd were not to be relied upon, and that if the idea of proposing infaUibUity had been entertained, it was given up. He also quotes a letter written home by a bishop, afterwards known among the Opposition, saying that there was no ground for the idea that in Rome they meant to make infaUibUity a dogma. That seemed to be an imagination, spread abroad with no good design. StiU, after the agitation which had taken place the CouncU could hardly pass the matter over in sUence. The Holy See would not curb the zeal of the bishops if they resolved to give effect to their persuasion, but would not itself take the initiative. But if anything was done, it would be some moderate measure, that would satisfy aU, and give no pretext of a party triumph. Lord Acton further says, what is confirmed from many quar ters, that Cardinal AntoneUi feared that the Pope was about to bring upon himself difficulties simUar to those which beset the earher years of his pontificate. Some treat AntoneUi's apparent 232 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE coldness as a ruse. But, Englishman-like, Lord Acton takes the hypothesis that requires least dissimulation, crediting the fore sight of AntoneUi with real apprehensions. Lord Acton expresses a belief that there might have been some idea of finding a substitute for infaUibUity in the suppres sion of freedom of faith and conscience ; with the expectation that the most prominent hindrance to the new dogma would be removed so soon as the Inquisition should be recognized as having one and the same legal position with Catholicism itself. He thinks that a great step in that direction would have been taken if the proposition of the SyUabus had been confirmed which condemns the assertion that the Pontiffs and CouncUs had ever transgressed the bounds of their power, or usurped the rights of princes. As to usurping the rights of princes, a writer like Lord Acton is at a disadvantage, compared with one like Professor Ceccucci, who wrote the history of General Councils, for the voluminous work of Frond. Ceccucci settles the point with an ease of which Lord Acton has no idea. The Church " never did usurp political power ; that possessed by her has always been the most legitimate on earth " (Frond, vol. iv. P- 358). But one point stated by Lord Acton is that infaUibUity had been looked upon as a means to an end ; and this is the kernel of the matter. Just as, logically, the doctrine of infal lible judgment was developed out of that of unlimited power, so, practicaUy, unlimited power must be exercised by an infallible judge. Admit that God has given aU power upon earth to one man, and surely you wiU not deny that, in mercy to His creatures, He will make that man infaUible. Admit, on the other hand, that the judgment which bids the secular arm smite this and shield that is infaUible, and surely you wiU own that the secular arm should obey. Liberal Catholics were, not unnaturaUy, incensed at the writing in the Civiltd at a moment when those in power might have been expected to set an example of moderation. The Freemasons were told that the reason why they dreaded the Council was that they would be condemned, and that no respectable persons would DE BANNEVILLE AND THE POPE 233 join them after that. And the Liberal Catholics were told that their reasons for dreading the CouncU were much- the same. They professed simUar principles with those of the Masons, which were sometimes caUed Principles of '89, sometimes Principles of Modern Society, or Toleration, or Liberty of Conscience and the Press, or Modern Constitutions, or the Rights of Science, or the Boons of Progress, or Liberalism. No wonder that men who had championed the Church of Rome as the Catholic Church, should tremble when they saw her sinking into a sect so strait as to put aU these principles under ban [(Civiltd, VII. viii. p. 285). On November 9 the Pope received the Marquis of Banne- vUle, newly returned to his post as ambassador of France. After many signs of vaciUation, the Emperor had finally decided not to ask for the admission of an ambassador. This policy met the views both of the Papal party and of those who desired the entire separation of the Church and the State. The latter had adopted the notion that they took a step towards separation by leaving the Church, while still an establishment of the State, to legislate for the nation over the head of the State. As early as July 10, 1868, M. Emile Ollivier, in the Corps Legislatif, dweUing on the fact that the Pope, in his Bull, did not name the Emperor, and that he held aU those addressed in it bound by it simply through its being posted up in Rome. said : It is declared that, by the simple fact of its being issued in Rome, every bishop in France is bound and must betake himself to Rome, on pain of disobedience. The Emperor or the civil power is not' thought of. It is the gravest act accom plished since 1789. It is the separation of Church and State, proclaimed, for the first time, by the Pope himself. On AprU 9, 1869, Ollivier again raised the subject, pro testing that the abstention of the government from the Council amounted to an abrogation of the organic articles of the Con cordat. Jules Favre said that it was the separation of Church and State, and as such he gratefuUy accepted it. These conse quences were denied by the minister, M. Baroche, who asserted, " After the Council, the rights of France wiU remain entire." 234 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE This boast passed in France, but not so at the Vatican. The Unitd Cattolica for AprU 14 showed that the usual ambiguity of the Bonaparte policy marked the replies of the ministers on this critical occasion. The bishops were to go to the Council with " their conscience in fuU liberty," and yet " after the Council the rights of France were to remain entire." " What," asks the Unitd, " does that mean ? Does France want to be free either to relieve or to oppose what the Council wiU define ? After having permitted her bishops to take part in an assembly which every Catholic must believe to be infallible, does Napo leon III mean to hold himself free to prosecute them if they preach the doctrines defined, and enforce the discipline enjoined by the Council ? " This straightforward question shows that M. Picard hit nearer to the point than either Ollivier or Favre ; for he cried, " It means a Church free in a State not free." ** Even that is not quite the truth ; which strictly is, A State not free in a Church which is free ; for the State is part, and the Church whole ; or, to recall the image from the early pages of the Civiltd, the State is the leg and the Church the man. We have seen it roundly asserted by the Civiltd that the Church free means canon law free. That being so, for any man to speak of the State being free, in any modern sense, is trifling. In its expositions of the SyUabus the Civiltd had laid down the true doctrine as follows : The first condition of an efficient alliance of the laws of the State with the laws of the Church, is the application in every case wherein spiritual penalties are in sufficient of the means of coercion whereof the State disposes. The voice of the pastor has not always efficacy sufficient to drive away the rapacious wolves from the fold of Christ. Therefore does it appertain to the prince invested with the authority of the sword to arm himself with its force, in order to repel and put to flight all the enemies of the Church (VI. ii. 137). Refusing to stand in this position is, in the esoteric sense, separating the State from the Church. To a conscientious Ultramontane it is absurd to say that a State in this manner 1 Friedberg, pp. 93, 94. THE POPE MYSTIFIES DE BANNEVILLE 235 9 subject to the Church is not free, as it would be to say that a body ruled by its informing mind is not free. That is the figure of speech which recurs at every turn of discourse on the subject. After it had been determined to ratify the policy censured by Picard, De BanneviUe had his interview. Most writers describe him as a willing tool of the Curia, and as doing all he could to lead France in the way which it might trace out for her. Lord Acton regards him as honestly hoping to compose a difference between the Italian and German schools of theology, by the moderating weight of French influence.1 Banneville's despatch, on the occasion now in question, would rather seem to countenance the former opinion than the latter.2 But the Pope in the interview did not say a word indicating his personal opinion as to the questions to be decided. He did, however, say that all must be left to the wisdom of the Fathers — as if all had not been prepared, and doubly prepared. He further said that the rash conjectures of hasty spirits — in manifest aUusion to the Civiltd — were to be regretted, as also the premature discussion of questions which would have been better reserved to the CouncU itself. It is not probable that this deceived M. de BannevUle as to the past, for he well knew how the Pope had encouraged the "premature discussions" ; but he mighttake it asthe covering of a retreat froma position found to be too advanced. Butawary man might have felt that perhaps the retreat was only a feint. The despatch of M. de BanneviUe shows that Pius IX, like every Italian, knows how to keep his own counsel. Even his renowned saying, I am tradition — La tradizione son io — is no more than what M. Veuillot had said in proving that the Pope could not be an innovator — " Peter can no more be an innova tor than the Holy Sphit, which reveals tradition to him." 3 The tranquillity of the Curia on this occasion was that of perfected preparation. The dissimulation would not provoke a remark from a Roman. The effect of both was to prevent the anti-infallibilists from organizing any opposition. 1 Zur Geschichte. 2 Friedberg, p. 330. 3 Vol. i. p. cxxi. 236 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Some examples of the points kept before readers arriving at the Holy City at this particular time may be of permanent interest. The Canadian Bishop of St. Hyacinthe was quoted as writing, " Sublime assembly, in which the eye of faith contem plates with wonder, poor and simple mortals who, sitting as judges, do not hesitate to impose the responsibility of their de cisions and judgments on the Holy Spirit, because they know and believe that they form together with Him one tribunal." The emphases are given as we find them.1 A Latin pamphlet on the crisis, by a layman, was ridiculed, and one point, which seemed most comical to the reviewer, was that the author proposed two such queer anathemas ; first, if any one offends against charity, let him be anathema ; secondly, if any one begins war, let him be anathema. The Archbishop of Lima, being ninety-four years of age, was unable to come in person, but sent his pastoral staff as a present to the Pope. It was of pure Peruvian gold, and of the value of two thousand pounds. From the thrice-blessed Republic of Ecuador came the Arch bishop of Quito, presenting a chalice of gold, rich with precious pearls. He bore valuable gifts in addition. That " Ulustrious Catholic," the President, Garcia Moreno, had, on a public occasion, been presenting prizes to students, when they joyfully laid down their medals to send them as an offering to the Holy Father. On seeing this, the President took from his breast a medal of rare value, all studded with gems, which had been presented to him by the government for distinguished services to the country. This he added to the tribute of the youths, and the Archbishop had the joy of laying the united oblation at the feet of the Pontiff.2 From Venezuela the Archbishop brought more than three thousand pounds in money. His people had also laden him with their valuables, ladies having taken off earrings, bracelets, 1 Civiltd, VII. viii. 335. 2 Under Moreno, Ecuador attained the distinction of being often mentioned, with solemn commendation, as the one and the only Catholic Slate in the world ; the one in which the principles of the Syllabus were applied. A SYMBOLIC BELL 237 necklaces, and rings to send, as tokens of their devotion to the impoverished Pope. Had our English journalists devoutly pondered the elaborate description given at this cheerful juncture of a bell designed by a priest, and presented for the use of the Presidents in the Council, they would not have wasted so much criticism as they did on the rhetoric of a speech reported in the Daily News, in 1875, as having been made by the Pope, censuring Mr. Glad stone. His Holiness spoke of that gentleman as a viper attack ing the bark of St. Peter, or something of that sort. Now the bell in question was described as being symbolic, within and without. The clapper of it was the ship of Peter, round the hull of wliich was coiled a serpent attempting to board the vessel, but it was finally precipitated with its head down, and the three- forked tongue shooting out. The doubt of our men of letters as to whether the Pope could use a metaphor describing a snake attacking a bark, illustrates, in general, what Cardinal Manning said of those gentlemen on the particular occasion of the Council — " When English Pro testants undertake to write of an Oecumenical Council of the Catholic Church, nothing less than a miracle can preserve them from making themselves ridiculous." *- It would require a miracle to prevent any one from making himself ridiculous who should criticize the Speeches of Pius IX, assuming that his metaphors must have been subject to some rule.2 We find the revolution called by the Civiltd " the executioner of the Church " ; and it is said that the Pontiff in his distress is " rendered more and more like Christ upon the Cross, whom he ' Priv. Pet., iii. p. 3. 2 Civiltd, VII. viii. 490. The inscription on the bell in question is as follows — Invocata — Immaculata Pius Nonus — Pastor bonus Per Concilium — Fert auxilium. Mundus crebris — tot tenebris Implicates — obcoecatus Per hoc Numen — et hoc Lumen Extricatur — illustratur, 238 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE represents, and with whom he can repeat, " My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me ? " (Id. p. 514). The Word of God is shown to be the source of human redemp tion, and then the following applications are made of this principle — -1 The State indeed must be civilized and modernized by separ ating it from the living Word in the Church, that it may die. . . . The laws must be civihzed and modernized by putting them in opposition to the laws of the Word, that they may be laws of death. . . . Some would wish the Word to reconcile Himself with Satan Schools must be civUized and modernized by separating them from the schools of the Word, that they may be schools of death. Wed lock must be civilized and modernized by separating it from the consecration of the Word, that it may be the wedlock of death. Public speech must be modernized and civilized by separating it from the influence of the Word, that it may be the speech of death. Everything, in fine, must perish, since everything must be secu larized, or torn away from that God who upholdeth all things by the Word of His power. . . . The modern revolution, inspired by Satan, would find that all its weapons directed against the Vatican were destined to have no other effect than that of multiplying the victories of the Word of God, who reigns there in the humble person of His Vicar " (pp. 522-26). The Court, if we may judge by its organs, was deeply affected at the want of faith displayed by many Catholics, who ex pressed fears lest the Council should define anything that it ought not to define. Did they not know that the Holy Ghost would preserve it unerring ? Why then aU this solicitude ? Could they not trust a body so guided to go right, without their advices and warnings ? They treated it "as an ordinary human assembly." This sounded like mockery to those who had any idea of how much Rome had done in employing art and man's device to prevent the Council from going wrong and to forestaU all possible impulses in any direction not predetermined. Had they only known of the long labour and the jealous precautions which we shaU see gradually coming to light, the retorts they did make would have been much more indignant. 1 The term verbo is employed, which in Italian has about the same effect as logos would have in Enghsh writing. CHAPTER XII Mustering, and Preparatory StimuU — Pope's HospitaUty — Alleged Pohtical Intent — Friedrich's First Notes — The Nations cited to Judgment — New War of the Rosary — Tarquini's Doctrine of the Sword — A New Guardian of the Capitol — November and December, 1869 WHILE the chiefs of the Curia and the leading prelates were testing their diplomatic skill, and the former were, on that field, meekly winning the prizes, the rank and file of the hierarchy were flocking in from aU the winds of heaven. The Roman nobles in many cases gave up theh palaces to the Fathers of the CouncU. With his habitual personal liberality, the Pope freely offered hospitality to all who would accept it. This simple act, natural to his station, and stiU more to his disposition, was smUed at as a good bid for votes. About three hundred bishops made themselves, in whole or in part, dependent for theh daUy expenses on the bounty of the man upon whose exaltation they were to decide. The Civiltd, as if to emphasize their dependence, told how they were lodged, supported, and assisted by him in aU the necessaries of life. Hence the mocking name of the " Pope's boarders," which greeted any manifestations of opinion on theh part. It is said that his expenses for the entertainment of the bishops amounted to one hundred pounds per day. A case of history repeating itself is suggested by these aUegations as to the diplomatic value of the Pope's hospi tality. Dr. Karl Benrath has restored to his place among Italian worthies one of the most picturesque figures of the many-hued hfe of that nation in the sixteenth century. This was Fra Bernardino Ochino, the aU-eloquent General of the Capuchins, whom the blot of the Inquisition had covered from 240 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE the common eye for three centuries. Ochino, who became a guest of Cranmer and a prebendary of Canterbury, wrote on the banks of the Thames, among other works, one called The Tragedy. Conceiving of the Papacy exactly as all modern Italian Protestants do, as the anti-Christ, and the master piece of Satan, he traces the rise of this dread power. Besides supernatural sources of ascendancy, he aUeges the fact that in early ages the Bishops of Rome entertained bishops out of the provinces when they fled to the capital from persecution, or came from other causes, and thus the Roman prelates acquired great influence over the others. Their object then was " Pri macy," out of which infallibility was in our day to come. Ochino puts into the mouth of the secretary to the Emperor, after he has discovered the Pope's yearnings, the foUowing words : " O Lord God, that there can be so much ambition in the heart of a man ! it is no marvel that he entertains in so friendly a mariner all strangers who come to Rome." Besides bishops came a mixed multitude — the devout Catholic, the keen politician, the commonplace tourist from every country, the gay sightseer, the American politician, the artist, the charlatan, the Indian civUian on furlough, and the learned official theologian. Few, but intent, came a new class of spectators — Italian Protestants, watching with eyes as open to aU priestly arts as men of the sixteenth century, but with a readiness to affiliate each part of a Roman show on its Pagan original, much beyond what was even then common among our countrymen. The Count Henri de Riancey, beholding the hierarchy pressing to the sacred walls, exclaims — Open then thy gates, metropolis of the world ; open thine ever lasting gates, that the Queen of glory may come in ! And who is this Queen of glory ? It is the Church. . . . Make way, then, for the angels of the Churches, spoken of by St. John. Make way for the divine hierarchy, the ranks of which are moving, with order, force, and holiness, terrible as an army with banners (Frond, vol. i. p. 9). One of the theologians has published a diary (Tagebuch), IGNORANCE OF BISHOPS 241 which wiU always remain one of the original sources of in formation on the Council. Its accuracy, like that of the Letters of Quirinus, has been assailed, and with not dissimUar result. Strong general assertions and weak proof, except on such minor points as show that the substance is unassailable, leave its accuracy but slightly impeached, and its truthfulness not at all discredited. The author states things which, by our standard, would be held private ; but however that may be by the standard of his own country, the things, when once published, take their place among the materials of history. Dr. Friedrich, a professor of Munich, was appointed theo logian for the Council to Cardinal Hohenlohe. He began his diary before leaving home. He found that it was vain to seek in the palace of Archbishop Von Scherr for such works in the original as a set of the Fathers, or a coUection of the Acts of the CouncUs. The Reverend Secretary said, " You know little of bishops if you think that those people study anything." This gentleman, who was to be the Archbishop's theologian at the CouncU, himself read only pamphlets. When Friedrich was on the railway platform, observing the two Archbishops of Munich and Bamberg, taking their departure for the Council, the confidential servant of the latter came up to the Professor and said, " You are not surely coming to Rome as a spy ? " Answering not the man but the master, he replied : " Let bishops take care that they do not betray the Church, for just as they are bound to speak to the best of their knowledge and conscience, so am I as a theologian." Thus Friedrich evidently expected to have to speak, as it would seem that Newman also did. He did not know how the secret plans had put aside all such possibUities. But if surprises awaited him as to the new part reserved for the doctors, there were surprises for the bishops also. Friedrich remarked that, as he traveUed farther south, less and less respect was shown to the clergy, till in Italy the difference, as compared with Germany, became painful. At Trent, a scholar warned him to beware of poison, and said vol. 1. 16 242 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE that it was weU that DoUinger had not gone to Rome, as he would never have returned. The theologian, fuU of the lore of Munich, standing in the quaint Alpine city, on the Adige, with the image in his mind of the doctors who, three hundred years ago, there disputed before the bishops and before the world, would naturaUy form an exalted idea of the work awaiting him in the grander assem bly on the banks of the Tiber. The church of St. Maria Mag- giore would sweU, in his anticipation, into St. Peter's ; the listen ing prelates to a threefold or fourfold array. The struggle itself was to be much more concentrated, turning on one vital point. It was not now merely a question as to what was to be taught, but as to who was the divine teacher. It was not a dis pute about one doctrine or more, but about the very fountain of doctrine. It was not any question between the Church and her enemies, but one between the Church and her head. It was to be decided whether the oracle was the whole Church, or the Pope without the Church. The dispute was awkward. Raising it showed Protestants that Rome, whUe claiming infaUibUity, had not yet settled where it lay. After a narrow escape of being murdered on the railway near Terni, Friedrich reached the Holy City. Such was the throng, already, that he had to pay ten francs for the use of a room for a while in the afternoon, before going to his home in the Palazzo Valentini with Cardinal Hohenlohe. That palace stands in the Piazza of the Twelve Apostles, fuU of reminis cences of days when Alberich and his descendants ruled the city, and held the Popes, sometimes in prison, but always in subjection to the chiefs springing from Theodora and Marozia. On November 28, a discourse was delivered in St. Peter's, by Father Raimondo Bianchi, Procurator-General of the Dominicans, which was thought sufficiently important to be printed with the Freiburg edition of the Acta (p. 130). If good preaching lies in saying much and suggesting more, in the least time, this sermon is perfection ; for it occupies less than four octavo pages. A note which we have already heard delicately touched by Archbishop Manning, a note at that time THE TEMPORAL SWORD 243 as often sounded as any in the episcopal scale, was given forth with fuU power : " Be wise, O ye kings ; be instructed, ye judges of the earth." 1 On December 4, the Dominicans appeared again. The Pope, departing from the usual course, had appointed Father Jandel as their general ; some say selecting him that he might amend the theology of the order, the members of which were known to be weak Immaculatists, and suspected of not being sound Infallibilists. Father Jandel now broke out in a cir cular, which twenty years ago we should have smiled at as at new gri-gri, but which now seems to be more like to the red cross of the Muster. We shaU presently see how scientificaUy Tarquini had demonstrated that the right of directly wielding the temporal sword did, in spite of aU denials, belong to the Pope and a General Council, and we have already seen with what fascination popular pens were surrounding the life and death of the " soldier of the Cross." " We hasten," exclaims Jandel, " to announce to you the joy ful tidings, and we make speed to convey to you the pontifical brief which grants new indulgences for the recitation of the rosary during the whole continuance of the Vatican Council." The brief thus heralded looks as if the inspiration of St. Peter Arbues, " first inquisitor of the kingdom of Aragon," was be ginning to operate. The Pontiff informs the faithful that St. Dominic, armed with this rosary, as with an invincible sword, crushed the infamous heresy of the Albigenses. Therefore, in the present crisis, equipped with the same armour, and with the authority of the Vatican Council, they wUl be enabled to " overthrow and extirpate the manifold monsters of error that prowl around." To invite all to arm themselves 1 Bryce (p. 177) quotes from the second excommunication of Henry IV by Hildebrand as foUows : " Come now, I beseech you, O most holy and blessed Fathers and Princes, Peter and Paul, that all the world may understand and know that if ye are able to bind and to loose in heaven, ye are likewise able on earth, according to the merits of each man, to give and to take away empires, kingdoms, princedoms, marquisates, duchies, countships, and the possessions of all men.'' — Holy Roman Empire. 244 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE with this holy weapon, special indulgences are granted to those who will daUy recite ten rosaries, so long as the CouncU lasts. We believe a rosary consists of one Paternoster, ten Ave Marias, and one Gloria ; so that each week seven hundred prayers to the Virgin, seventy to God, with seventy doxologies, would have to be repeated. The Pope strongly expresses his simple faith in the efficacy of this expedient.1 AU who know what has been going on in Europe of late years know that the time for smiling at rosaries is past. A charm or a chupattie ceases to be a trifle when it becomes the symbol connecting devotion with deeds of blood. At a time when miUions upon millions of children are in the hands of those who, with gentle manners and profoundly conscientious views, instil antipathies which time can scarcely extract, charms become formidable when to such antipathies they are the symbols of — as the Civiltd puts it — a pure conscience, a sublime cause, and an immortal hope. The significance of these demonstrations was greatest for those who had watched the doctrines which were being ela borated by the Jesuits and diffused both through periodicals and such scholastic books as that of Tarquini. The doctrine of Boniface VIII, that the material sword was not in the hand of the priest, but only at his beck, was being replaced by a higher one. Boniface accused those of Manichean dualism who did not confess that both swords were in his power. But it proved that he had himself leaned too much towards dual ism, for he denied the material sword to the priest's own hand. This doctrine would no longer do. Cardinal Tarquini, who, it must not be forgotten, is set before us by Cardinal Manning as the modern example of teaching mUder than that of BeUarmine and Suarez, goes beyond the theology of former times, and claims the direct right of the sword, even in war, for the hand of the Pope and a Council, though stiU denying it to inferior ecclesiastical authorities. I admit, says Tarquini (p. 39), that the Church is a spiritual 1 Guerin, pp. 61, 62 ; Friedberg, p, 82. TARQUINI'S DOCTRINE OF THE SWORD 245 society as to its end ; I deny that it is so as to its substance — that is, as to the members composing it, since they are not mere spirits but men. I admit that it ought to use spiritual means — that is, means which are adapted to the attainment of the spiritual end. I deny that it should use only means which are spiritual in them selves and in their nature. Every one who is not a simpleton knows that men (in whom soul is joined with body) are to be moved, corrected, and coerced ; hence they cannot be led to an end, even a spiritual one, by purely spiritual means. But the matter, quality, and proportion of the means is to be determined by the requirements of the end. As to the words of our Lord, that His disciples shaU not exercise lordship as the kings of the GentUes do, he admits that they bind the Church to shun dominion so far as that means a spirit of ambition whereby any one might subject others to himself for his own glory or advantage ; but he denies that they require her to shun dominion in so far as it means the office of ruling, and that of administering means contributing to the attainment of her end. He labours to meet the objection against the use of force by the Church, drawn from her own doctrine, that men are to be called to her bosom freely and without compulsion. He asserts that liberty here means freedom from intrinsic neces sity, but not from extrinsic necessity, or coaction. This co- action or compulsion does not prevent either merit, or the attainment of the spiritual end ; indeed, when applied by the Church, greatly promotes them. He admits that compul sion is not to be used towards infidels — that is, unbaptized persons — but denies that it is not to be used towards baptized persons. As to the objection founded on 2 Tim. iv. 2-5, that " the weapons of the Church are altogether confined to exhortations and tears," he simply says, I deny it. Then he argues that the words of St. Paul in this place rather weaken than sup port those who oppose the use of force ; because the terms he employs are both general and sharp : reprove, rebuke, be instant in season and out of season. AU means which neces sity may caU for are included. He admits that longsuffering 246 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE and doctrine are to be employed, if necessity demands no harsher means ; but denies that they are to be employed exclusively. He demands that the character of the times in which these texts were written shall not be forgotten, namely, times in which the Church, being under the unfriendly govern ment of the heathen, was not able to put forth the fulness of her power. But it cannot be proved by any arguments that this right (jus gladii) may not be immediately exercised by the supreme magistracy of the Church, if necessity call for it ; for the contrary indeed may be demonstrated from natural law, since the Church is a Perfect Society ; and no passage can be cited from positive divine law in which it is really prohibited, for Matthew xxvi. 52 is quite inapplicable, where Christ says to Peter, then a private man, " Put up again thy sword into its place " ; and 2 Cor. x. 4, where Paul, declaring the might of his own power, says, " The weapons of our warfare are not carnal (that is, are not fragUe or futUe), but are mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds." The fact that the meaning of carnal weapons is cooUy assumed to be fragUe or futUe ones, is not to be overlooked. It would naturaUy foUow that the chassepots at Mentana, which were neither fragUe nor futUe, were not carnal weapons. Of course Tarquini would have said that though in their proper nature carnal, when serving a purely spiritual end they took on a spiritual character. But we cannot forget that the " strong holds " which the weapons of Paul were mighty to pull down were " imaginations," and the captives they led bound were " thoughts." That is a sphere in which the proper weapon is not either shot or fetter, but the word and the works of men whom God makes wise to teach and holy to charm. There is one symbol which the Vatican never sees, that of the true and only Head of the Church, with no sword in His hand, much less two, but one sharp sword with two edges proceeding out of His mouth. That alone is the weapon that is not carnal but mighty through God. We now begin to see the grounds cropping out on which Mr. Bryce's doctrine of two heads to the Catholic State, one NEW SUPERSTITIONS 247 civil and one spiritual, was condemned. The days of dualism and Manicheism in any form were numbered. With their complaints that the Jesuits, both in the con fessionals and in their text-books, corrupted Catholic morality, the Liberal Catholics mingled loud and bitter complaints that they sought to make the people superstitious and to keep them ignorant. It was often aUeged that even their schools, or those under their virtual if not ostensible control, were themselves preserves of ignorance and superstition, keeping the scholars from an education, according to their capacity, for one " suited to their position," and at the same time pre paring them to receive all kinds of fables and " lying wonders," — a term not infrequently quoted by Liberal Catholics. Those fables and wonders would open a field so large, and one lying on a level so low, that we have not cared even to glance at them. As found in local clerical papers, or books of what is called " devotions," they are so gross that a writer could hardly repeat them without incurring loss, not only in the respect of others, but in self-respect. Liberal Catholics, however, know that they are a real power in Jesuit hands, one of the powers in the future war against science, the Press, and free govern ment, and through these, against Protestantism. One speci men of the higher order we may give, from which some opinion may be formed of those vented in small places, by ignorant men, through low publications. We speak of the great Civiltd,1 of the " metropolis of the Christian world," and of a deliverance of the Capitol itself. The plan of the Garibaldians, insists the Civiltd, in October 1867, was to seize the Capitol and to ring the great beU, at the sound of which all over Rome their hordes were to rise. But Anna Maria Taigi, who had died thirty years before, in the odour of sanctity, had seen prophetic visions of Rome wasted with fire and sword, and dreadful with heaps of un- buried corpses, breeding dire pestUence. Some thought that 1849 might have been the fulfilment of the vision ; others that it was the attempt of 1867. But by the special " devo- 1 VII. vii. 432 fi- 248 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE tion " to this saintly woman, such dread event was to be averted. On the evening when aU felt that the shock was coming, but no one saw whence or how, a priest of ninety years old, " weU known to aU in Rome," said to another, " I feel assured that the venerable Anna Maria wiU defend the city ; and her image must at once be carried to the Capitol, for that is the point they will aim at ; the Capitol once saved, Rome belongs to the Pope." The other priest objected that the hour was late and the streets unsafe. The old man insisted, re assured him, blessed him, and sent him away with the image, charging him to place it on the highest point. As the priest, bearing the image, reached the steps of the Capitol, a friend from a window, perceiving him, earnestly warned him to go home. Trembling, yet resolute, he pressed up the hiU. AU was silent as a desert. Having reached the utmost height under the bell-tower, he was fixing up the image, when he heard people move, and a door opened. A woman appeared. " I came," said he, " solely for the purpose of setting up an image." It would appear that it was a picture, for he had brought wafers with him to fasten it. Carlotta (for that was the woman's name) looked at the image, and cried, " Why, that is the venerable Anna Maria Taigi ; I also practise devotion to her." The priest withdrew in silence and in haste. Meanwhile a priest from Bologna went in to visit the nonagenarian devotee of Anna Maria. " Don Pedro," cried the old man, " the Vener able has taken possession of the Capitol in the name of the Pope, and she wiU defend it from the Garibaldians." The attempt on the Capitol was almost immediately made and failed. Those who remember the tale of the Capitol when Brennus was the Garibaldi wiU be tempted to ask how great is the present elevation of faith above that of the days of the sacred geese. CHAPTER XIII Great Ceremony of Executive Spectacle, caUed a Pro-Synodal Congrega tion, to forestall Attempts at Self-Organization on the part of the Council — The Scene — The AUocution — Officers appointed by Royal Proclamation — Oath of Secrecy — Papers Distributed — How the Nine had foreseen and forestalled all Questions of Self- organization — The Assembly made into a Conclave, not a General Council — Cecconi's Apology for the Rules THE event now to be described was called a Pro-Synodal Congregation. Being designed to give parliamentary effect to secret decisions of the Court, it was in reality a Cere mony of Executive Spectacle. Such a description seems obscure, but the official name is misleading. Congregation is the word used in Councils for deliberative sittings, in which measures are proposed and debated, in contrast to Sessions, which mean only grand public solemnities, where decrees already voted are formaUy adopted. Therefore the word Congregation would suggest deliberation and some sort of consultative participation, by the bishops, in the proceedings. This prelude to the Council was not a vain show, but had been contrived by the best diplomatic and artistic skiU of the Curia. After the Directing Congregation had spent nine months in elaborating rules of procedure to bind the bishops neck and foot, the Nine began to see that, should the Council meet before it was organized, it might faU into the temptation to organize itself. Some one skilled in parliamentary forms might move to elect officers, and to have, as in former times, open discussion, in order to hear questions of theology argued by the doctors, before they, the judges, began to frame their sentence. Some one might even suggest that they should agree upon their own rules of procedure. Now, aU these points had been irrevocably settled beforehand against the episcopate by its superiors, and any attempt to discuss them might cause 250 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE the greatest confusion. If some spirit, perhaps like Darboy, as is gravely said, " excessively enamoured of liberty," should once stir such questions, the records of Trent were there to show that it might cause trouble to settle them. Therefore the Nine were disquieted. Such possibilities must be fore stalled. Moreover, it had been resolved that, to take time by the forelock, the aU-important Rules should be printed in advance, and should, before any possible self-action of the Council, be distributed during the grand public ceremonial of opening. Doubtless, when first adopted, this resolution seemed not only satisfactory, but far-seeing. It was not tUl as late as the month of August that some one pair of eyes among the Nine caught sight of the fact that, the opening ceremony being legally a Session of the CouncU, some " advanced spirit " might take advantage of that circumstance to assert that the Rules, being issued in a sitting of the CouncU, were an act of the CouncU, and therefore were liable to revision by it. That would never do. Therefore, at two sittings, on August 16 and 22, the former resolution was rescinded, and the ingenious expedient was devised of the Ceremony of Executive Spectacle now to be described.1 The Rules could be issued as part of the ceremony, and thereby would every pretext for declaring them an act of the Council be forestaUed. The Sixtine Chapel, connected in the imagination of the Fathers with aU the glories and sanctities of theh Church, was specially fitted up for the event. From every region under heaven gathered prelates richly attired, each feeling the splendour of the scene, and consciously augmenting it. Their susceptibUities of spectacle were vividly awake. As boys, those susceptibUities had been trained and forced. As men, they had themselves trained and forced the same susceptibUities in others. Now, in old age, they came to have the art of government by spectacle practised upon them selves ; practised by masters to whom their consciences, sym pathies, and imaginations taught them to look up. Under 1 Cecconi, p. 153. SCENE IN THE SIXTINE CHAPEL 251 the skUled touch of those masters were they now about to let drop, without a word, and for the most part unconsciously, privileges of their order, which had been guarded by their pre decessors as carefully as they would themselves guard their episcopal rings. The place, the men, the scene, the coming displays, and the dawning future, big with events, were, for the moment, all in all to them. It was the historic eve of the day of days ; and deep feeling fluttered under their silk and brocade and gold. Before their eyes spread the wonderful painting of Michael Angelo, in which, according to M. Frond, he " reproduced " the scene of the last judgment. It is a monument to the power of genius, even when driven to work on what the true aesthetic of the painter told him should be left to the imaging of the spirit, and should not be attempted by the pencil. There, again, stood the vacant throne, waiting for him who, when he first ascended it, had, as the reader wiU remember, these words solemnly impressed upon his ear, in the house and by the ministers of God : " Know that thou art Father of princes and of kings, and art Governor of the world." 1 The Cardinal Priests and Cardinal Bishops were on the right of the throne, the Cardinal Deacons on the left. Near it stood Patriarchs, Primates, and Archbishops, in regular gradation, and after them in regular gradation came Bishops, Abbots, and Generals of Orders. Every briUiant figure in that throng was standing, except the Cardinals. Through a door, preceded by his household, was seen entering the form of him who holds the place of God upon earth. The Sacred CoUege stood up, all clad in violet, with rochette, manteUeta, and mozzetta. Then all cast themselves down upon their knees.2 The Pontiff, blessing his prostrate vassals, moved to the throne, seated himself, and, with beaming visage, looked paternally 1 Professor Massi's Life of Pius IX. Frond, i. p. 16. Also Vitelleschi. 2 This is what is stated in the descriptions ; but the Acta do not seem entirely to sustain it (p. 26). Cardinales surrexerunt, caeteri qui aderant genua submiserunt, is language which seems to indicate that the Car dinals did not kneel. 252 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE down on the rulers of docfle miUions— rulers whose many- tinted splendour was but the effluence of his own majesty. Now, in his hale, ringing voice, the Pope read an aUocution. It expressed much affection for his venerable brethren, and solicitude for the success of their approaching deliberations. To those who had come up fuU of confidence in the modera tion of the Curia, all that they heard was reassuring. To those who had been troubled with fears of hazardous innovation, the bearing and words of the initiated had been soothing, and so was aU that now feU from the throne. StiU, the few who really studied would look in vain for light on the questions which had been agitated. Those who had such questions in their minds did not know that from December to the middle of October the Nine had been engaged in answering them, and had already taken care that every seam through which any con stitutional liberties might leak in should be tightly caulked.1 Nor did they they know that they were to-day gathered to gether for the very purpose of having many of these questions laid so deep that they should never rise again. Had they known the whole plan, was there one of them man enough to defeat it ? Mighty against civU authority, were they not weak as water against a higher and more domineering priest ? Even the few would hardly have time to realize the fact that the paternal and cordial aUocution gave no light upon practical matters, when lo ! Cardinal AntoneUi on the right of the throne, and Cardinal GrasseUini on the left ! And, presently, Cardinal ClareUi, the Secretary of Briefs, comes forth and proclaims — Our Most Holy Lord Pius IX, Pope, for the good ordering of things to be done in this Council, as more largely contained in the Letters Apostolic to be forthwith distributed, hath elected and named Presidents of the General Congregations, to preside over the same in his name and with his authority, the Most Reverend Lords Cardinals Charles de Reisach, Bishop of the Sabina, Antony de Luca, Joseph Andrew Bizzarri, Aloysius Bilio, and Hannibal Capalti (Acta, p. 30). 1 Cecconi, p. 161. ACTS IN THE SIXTINE 253 This was immediately foUowed by the proclamation of the name of Bishop Fessler as Secretary, and the names of other high officials. Upon this announcement the Pope solemnly gave the pontifical benediction. Without the CouncU, and before the CouncU, he had bound on earth the question of presidents, of secretary, of officers, and of rules. But his first deed was not bound in heaven. Reisach, proclaimed by him as chief president of the Council, was never to behold it. As the Fathers took their seats, the master of the ceremonies led in Prince Orsini in the insignia of Prince-in- Waiting. The temporal prince kissed the sacred foot, and then took his place on the steps of the throne. Now a long line of dignitaries was presented, and going down on the ground, formed a crescent of beautiful kneeling figures before the sovereign. Two Cardinal Deacons brought out the volume of the Holy Gospels, and, standing close to the Pontiff, held it above his knees. Monsignor Jacobini then read out as foUows — We, elected by your Holiness officers of the General Vatican Council, promise and swear upon the Holy Gospels, faithfully to discharge the duties required of us respectively, and moreover not to divulge or disclose to any one outside of the bosom of the said Council, any of the matters proposed for examination in the said Council, nor yet the discussions, nor the speeches of individuals, but on all these, as also upon other matters committed to us, to observe inviolable secrecy.1 Thereupon, each one rising in turn, and advancing in front of the priest-king, laid his right hand upon the book, held by the two Princes of the Church, and then said : " I, N. N., promise, vow, and swear, according to the tenor of the words just read. So help me God and these God's Holy Gospels ! " He then kissed the book and the sacred foot.2 About the middle of the long succession rose John Baptist de Dominicis Tosti, and stood to take the oath as one of the 1 Acta, p. 32. Also Civiltd, December 1869, p. 74Q- Cecconi, Documenta, lix. 2 Frond. 254 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE promoters of the CouncU. Suppose that a voice had at that moment cried : " Some two years hence, this de Dominicis Tosti and Prince Chigi shaU sit side by side with two ministers of the Reformed Faith, as joint presidents over a public dis cussion, in this city, on the question whether Peter ever visited Rome, between Catholic priests on the one side, and Evangelical ministers on the other." What an anathema would have burst from the disgusted prelates! No such shadow of an impossible shade dimmed the brUliancy of the scene. WhUe under the various charms of that scene, the beauty of the colours, the perfection of the postures, and the grace of the men, few would remark that the form of oath, binding, as it did, to strict secrecy on the very subjects discussed, and even on speeches, turned their forthcoming assembly from a General CouncU into a Roman conclave. A few indeed might see, but the overwhelming majority would not see, that several points which Councils had settled for themselves, even when they met under Emperors, were now being splendidly settled for them beforehand — in their presence, indeed, but without their co-operation, and scarcely with their consciousness. How could they think of such commonplace affairs in a moment like that ? What with the glorious garments of the Sacred College, the stars and ribbons of Prince Orsini, the beauty of the enthroned Priest-King, the crescent of kneeling dignitaries before him, and the touching symbol of the temporal prince kissing the priestly foot and reverently waiting at the priestly throne, there was enough to dazzle men less under the speU of robes. True, the temporal prince was here but a pale reminiscence of better days — of those days which some of them had caUed to the mind of the people since the gathering of 1867 ; days when kings, ere they received the crown, lay pros trate before the altar, and swore on their knees to administer canon law ; days when they had, moreover, to take both sword and sceptre from the hands of the bishop.1 StiU, this tem- 1 A picture of this scene, full both of regrets and latent desires, will be found drawn since the Council in Manning's Four Great Evils, p. 87. PROGRAM OF CEREMONIES 255 poral prince served to assert rights which had never been re nounced, and was a comforting token of brighter times after the CouncU. No sooner was the swearing of the officers over, than the Pope took his departure. Then came the master of the cere monies, and distributed some papers to the Fathers.1 They proved to be the AUocution just delivered, the Program of Ceremonies for the opening of the CouncU, and another document, Letters Apostolic — longer, and seemingly duUer, than the Program. But this, too, was distributed by the master of ceremonies. At Courts where government by spectacle is preferred to government by reason, ceremonies enclose a wide area. What was the right of proposition, or the right of definition, or the right of public discussion, or the right of printing, or the right of meeting, in comparison with the proper places, forms, and postures ? Did not Article 136 direct that the sacred pallium was to be taken off the Holy Father by the Cardinal Deacon, and to be delivered over to the Sub-Deacon Apostolic ? Did not Article 39 direct that the Sub-Deacon Apostolic, accompanied by two judges of the High Court of the Signet, should bear the slippers to the throne ; and Article 40 direct that the Pontiff should put them on ? 2 Probably for one bishop who after retiring looked first into the fateful Rules, ninety would look into the Program. It was two days after the issue of these documents that Professor Friedrich arrived in Rome. He found the Arch bishops of Munich and Bamberg and the Bishop of Augsburg with the Program in their hands, and also the Rules of Pro cedure. They were fuU of confidence that the Curia did not intend to propose anything dangerous. But Friedrich wanted to learn what were the subjects to be proposed, on which point the bishops knew nothing. The members of Commis sions had all been bound by oath to conceal, even from their own diocesans, what was prepared for them to vote. It was 1 Stimmen aus Maria Laach, Neue Folge, Heft vi. pp. 1 54-5 5 . Civiltd, Serie VII. vol. viii. pp. 739-40. Frond, vol. vii. pp. 64-71. 2 Signaturae Votantes ; see Frond, iii. p. 10. 256 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE to be presented to them with this alternative: Vote it, or become marked men ! On reaching the Palazzo Valentini, Friedrich found that aU that was known by Cardinal Hohenlohe as to the subjects which he would have to vote upon amounted to this — a few days previously Cardinal de Angelis had asserted that nothing would be done beyond condemning the principles of 1789. This proves that the purple, at least of Cardinal Hohenlohe, was kept as far aloof from the secrets of the Nine as the black of Friedrich. Quirinus says (p. 77) that the most distinguished theologian in Rome, Cardinal Guidi, was not only kept in perfect ignorance of aU that was being prepared, but was never admitted to an audience with the Pope after he had expressed to him his own views. Another notability is said by the same author to have been also out of the circle of the trusted, and many writers share this view ; this was Father Beckx, the General of the Jesuits. Words ascribed to him by Quirinus are these : "To recover two fractions of the States of the Church they are pricking on to a war against the world ; but they wiU lose all." Friedrich found that the decision of constitutional points of vital importance was to be wrapped up in a gay gauze of ceremonies. The very form to be given to the Decrees was slipped in among the items of the pageant. The conciliar formula used at Trent was replaced by that of Papal Bulls. The coUective hierarchy were not to be permitted to say, It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us ; nor to say, This Holy Council ordains and decrees. The name of the Pope alone was to appear as decreeing, and the only words in the decree indicating the existence of any CouncU were " The Holy Council approving." Matters like this, affecting not only the framework of the Church, but the seat of dogmatic authority, were settled without a note of preparation, in a program of ceremonies, among directions about faldstools, incense, and the Pope's slippers. It was as if the Lord Chamberlain, when the Queen was about to open a new Parliament, should put out a program of precedence, THE RULES OF PROCEDURE 257 costumes, and ceremonies, foisting in a few clauses indicating that Her Majesty would promulge a statute or two, with the approbation of the assembled Lords and Commons. It would be no trifle if he did so of his own motion, but would become tremendously serious if it had been done with full cognizance of the monarch.1 No wonder that the keen-eyed Professor was driven from the, Program to the Rules of Procedure. But the fact that the other was the document first read, even by him — a man in whom the decorative element is evidently too feeble for a useful priest, and the critical element too strong — indicates the direction which the studies of gentlemen like his archbishops and bishops would take ; gentlemen, who knowing that they had been jealously kept in the dark respecting what they were to be caUed to vote upon as the faith of their Church for ever, were nevertheless satisfied, by a few bows and smfles, that it was to be something of no importance. Friedrich was deeply moved by what he found in the Rules, coupled with what he considered the ignorance of the bishops. Every adept, he cries, must see that virtually the form here used in propounding decrees contains Papal infallibility. It is the Pope, and he alone, that defines and decides. Infalhbihty is even now attributed to him, and not to the Council, and then, seeing that this formula is to be acted upon in the first session (or public cere mony), it is the Pope who formulates the decree without having taken even the advice of the Council, and without any discussion on its part. It is not so much as known what are to be the subjects of the Decrees which the Council will adopt ; and yet Decrees con taining definitions are announced for the 8th. What can this 1 Theiner, speaking of the relation of the three Popes under whom the Council of Trent sat, to that Council, says : " It is as clear as the sunUght that these Pontiffs were not Dictators but Approvers of the laws which the Fathers, in conjunction with the Legates, framed. In support of this he cites two letters, one from Paul III and the other from Pius IV. They both faithfuUy promise to confirm whatever the Council adopts. The former says, Even though it may somewhat conflict with the decisions of former Councils, or with the privileges of the Holy See. When this was read in the Council, the Bishop of Fiesole cried out : "¦ Let it be without prejudice to the universal authority of this Council." (Acta Genuina, vol. i. pp. xvi and 154.) VOL. 1. *7 258 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE mean ? Are we reaUy to have Papal infalhbihty carried by accla mation, as the Civiltd suggested, or shaU we only have a Decree, as they had at Trent, declaring the CouncU open, and regulating the mode of life of its members ? Who can teU ? For my own part I am uncommonly disquieted (p. io). This disquietude of Friedrich represented the first shock of coUision against sunk fences, which had cost the Nine long labour. According to their faithful historian, the " most arduous and thorny of their tasks was that of settling the pro cedure." It was admitted by the Nine that, even in the fifth Lateran Council, the question was put to the Fathers, whether the Rules drawn up were acceptable. It was also feared that the bishops might be offended if the Pope settled the Rules without hearing their opinion. But, on the other side, there were three arguments : first, the danger of " interminable " discus sions ; secondly, the danger of " some spirit excessively enamoured of liberty, and of too advanced opinions " ; and, thirdly, the history of former Councils (p. 148). So in June it was finaUy determined that the CouncU should not be per mitted to have a word to say to its own rules and forms of procedure. And in August, as we have seen, the perfect plan of forestaUing all attempts to say a word upon them was contrived. One possible objection was brought under attention, by the history of previous CouncUs, namely, that there might be a danger of the Pope restraining the rightful liberty of the bishops. This idea, however, was dispersed by the hght logic which passes at Court. " It would be no less a foUy than an insult to think that a pontifical law could aim at lessening the liberty of the CouncU " (p. 147). In this happy sentence the now mitred historian refines on the words of M. Veufllot, who was content to say that aU would be free because the Pope would be free. The consultations of the Nine must have been serious upon the critical point of denying to the CouncU the right of intro ducing proposals. The course finally decided upon caUed for DOCTORS AND LAYMEN AT TRENT 259 boldness in the deed, combined with art in the drapery. It was first settled that the right of proposition belonged to the Pope alone. Then it was argued that if this right was granted to the bishops, " it would turn the Council itself into a con stitutional assembly" — which was just what, with aU their faults, the earlier Councils had been, and even that of Trent, in an inferior degree. The serious question of excluding all members of the Church but those constituting the CouncU had to be faced. Cecconi cannot conceal that at Trent the entrance to the Council HaU, during the discussions of the Doctors, was free. MassareUus, the indefatigable secretary of that Council, in his minute of those present at the first session, gives more names of lay men than of archbishops. The insertion of their names means more than that they were in the building — they had seats of honour.1 The number of the order of priests present at that first sitting far exceeded that of the bishops. True, they had no vote ; but they had a most important office, that of dis cussing points of doctrine, in the presence of the bishops, before the latter themselves began to do so. They were the Bar, the prelates, the Bench. MassareUus himself, secretary from the beginning, was only a doctor, tiU the CouncU reached the days of Pius IV, who made him a bishop.2 AU the dragooning of the middle ages had not taught men that it was right for miUions to sit outside in the dark, whUe a few priests consulted, and determined how their creeds, catechisms, ordination vows, marriage obligations, parental rights, and national duties were to be altered. The vast changes consummated at Trent had not yet done their work in reducing the human mind to servility. The Bible had not been shackled by a General CouncU. The Press had not been scientifically gagged. Authors and bookseUers had not 1 " Post praelatos sedent nobiles, si qui adsunt." — MassareUus, Acta Gen., i, 5. 2 Acta Genuina, vol. i. 29, 30. Licet sub Paulo III, et Julio III, essem tantum utr. jur. doct. et protonotarius apostolicus, sub Pio autem IV, eram episcopus Telesinus. — Acta Gen., i. p. 5. 260 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE felt the scourge of the Index. Schools and coUeges had not been shut up against discussion and free inquiry, in any such degree as was then introduced. Consequently the Western Catholic of that day, though in a sense Roman, was by no means that passive creature of priestly authority into which three centuries of the sway of the Tridentine Decrees, administered by a monarch never checked by a public legisla ture, have moulded the modern layman. At Trent the people were present to hear what was said. At the Vatican their political position and religious belief were both to be decided upon by decrees not reformable, like aU that men do ; but irreformable, as if God had made them. Yet the presence of the people was looked upon as " the inter ference of persons from without," and this, it was felt, would be " a deplorable inconvenience," notably aggravated by the temper of the times because of the enormous diffusion of the Press. The j ournals could not be prevented from writing about the Council ; but means were sought to keep the subjects under discussion from the knowledge of the " democracy," as Maret calls priests and people. They should learn the tenor of Decrees adopted only when they were ratified (Cecconi, p. 253). To this end, three points were resolved upon : first, the General Congregations (that is, the deliberative sittings) should be altogether private ; secondly, the public Sessions (that is, the grand solemnities for adopting and promulgating Decrees already framed and voted) should be open only in the liturgical part, the legislative part being strictly close ; thirdly, aU the Fathers and officers should be bound to the deepest sUence (p. 254). We are far from saying that the bishops of the time before Trent would have accepted a Roman conclave like this, in lieu of a General CouncU of the Catholic Church ; but if they had done so, the laity of that time, from Emperor to burgher, would not have suffered it. The laity then did not represent the offspring of ten generations successively confined in the Tridentine cribs. Their rights, though roughly defined, were readily asserted, and sturdily maintained. SECRET MEETINGS 261 The Directing Congregation, having now existed for nearly five years, had preordained all that was to come to pass in the Council. It had held fifty-nine formal meetings, very many of which were devoted to the Rules of Procedure. Beyond the purpled Nine, not a soul was ever admitted, save only Monsignor Giannelli, their secretary. Five of the Nine were the destined Presidents of the Council. So that, of the whole CoUege of Cardinals, only four besides the Presidents were in the secrets of this body. Just at a few of the last meetings, Bishop Fessler, the secretary of the CouncU, was called in. It is not needful to say that the Directing Con gregation was in constant official communication with the Pontiff.1 1 Cecconi, p. 268. CHAPTER XIV The Eve of the Council — Rejoicings — Rome the Universal Fatherland — Veuillot's Joy — Processions — Symbolic Sunbeams — the Joybells — The Vision of St. Ambrose — The Disfranchisement of Kings THE Civiltd described how, in beholding prelates daUy arrive, the joy of Rome rose higher and higher ; joy resembling but surpassing that of the great events of 1854, 1862, and 1867. Not only prelates came, but champions of the sword, the pen, and the tribune, ready to face the world in the cause of the Pope-King. Count Henri de Riancey begs pardon of Rome for indulging, at such a moment, in a word for France. Yet his heart does not turn to France, except on account of what she has done for the Pope. Let Rome, the fatherland of all fatherlands, permit to us this flash of patriotism. It is France which has the honour of guarding the last fragments of the pontifical dominions . . . She has loved righteousness ; and that is the reason why she is anointed with the oil of gladness above her fellows (Frond, vol. i. p. xix.). Poor France ! that love of righteousness, which had made her slay so many Italians to keep up the temporal power, was not to avert from her, " in the year of the Council," a baptism other than that of the oil of gladness. Ordinary Christians would not catch the reference in the above quotation. To them, " loving righteousness," especiaUy when connected with the person of the Messiah, is not identified with, but in holy opposition to, the idea of setting Christian ministers in rank before secular princes, and in power above kings. But " He loved righteousness and hated iniquity " stands upon the tomb of HUdebrand, who sought to establish the " dominion of Christ," the " kingdom of God," the " reign of righteousness," or as many similar expressions as you please, by subjecting all the kings of the earth to the Priest of God. Pius IX is frequently spoken of as the founder of the lordship JOY OF THE ULTRAMONTANES 263 of the Pope over the whole earth in the future, as HUdebrand was the founder of his lordship over it in the past. Therefore the sweetness felt by a good Ultramontane in connecting the two together. I am bewfldered with joy, cried M. Veuillot. I try to depict that joy, to swim in life. There is an unspeakable gladness in men's souls. People feel an aurora. I picked up a number of journals, and was going to answer a lively article against myself, in the Gazette de France ; but the author has no idea how all his eloquence faUs short of a man who, in one and the same day, has seen Pius IX, Rome, and the Sun. Pius IX had not admitted M. Veuillot to kiss the sacred foot for merely literary service. The devoted advocate laid at the feet he kissed three thousand pounds in money, coUected, through his paper, for the expenses of the CouncU. M. VeuUlot scolds M. Taine grandly, for having made some com parison between Rome and Paris — Paris, stretching from the field of Pantin on one side, to the Follies BeUevUle on the other ; and Rome, which has no limits but those of the world, and does not accept those — Paris, which gives birth to M. Roche- fort ; and Rome, which directs the nineteenth CEcumenical CouncU ! Had M. Taine seen Rome yesterday, full of proces sions of aU colours, and bishops of aU countries, he would have said it was more lovely than Paris. The processions of all colours were no fancy stroke. Nine days of solemn service in honour of the approaching anniver sary of the Immaculate, and at the same time of the CouncU, gave an opportunity of showing to strangers aU the confra ternities of Rome. They marched to the various basilicas, especiaUy to St. Peter's ; the ostensible object being to worship the sacred relics which, with uncommon magnificence, were exposed to theh veneration. The clergy of all lands saw and were seen with wonder and delight. " When therefore," said Eusebius, speaking of Nicaea, " the Emperor's order was brought into all the provinces, persons set out as if for some goal, and ran with all imaginable alacrity, for the hope of good things drew them, and the 264 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE participation of peace, and lastly a new miracle, to wit, the sight of so great an Emperor." ** Dr. Friedrich does not express himself so prettily as Eusebius on the appearance of the assembled clergy. The Asiatic cries, " And one city received them aU, as it were some vast garland of priests, made up of a variety of beautiful flowers." The Bavarian says, " The clergy of every country have sent a strong contingent, from the proud monsignore to the dirtiest viUage priest." The importance of sunny weather for public events, great everywhere, is perhaps exaggerated in Rome. Pius IX is believed to be peculiarly susceptible to sunbeams. Three of his most memorable days are, by his adorers, connected with a sunburst which shone for him especiaUy. Professor Massi relates how, on the day of his taking " possession, the apos tolic cortege followed the " briUiant carriage " of the new Pope from the Via Sacra up the Coelian HiU, the Cardinals being mounted on " steeds richly adorned " — doubtless worthy to be compared with those SicUian steeds which bore Gregory the Great, of whose stud Gregorovius soberly says, " We scarcely doubt but that Pindar would have thought the apostolic horses worthy of an ode." 2 The day was overcast — which omen had a damping effect — but just as the new Pope approached the Lateran, a glorious rainbow spanned the east, gladdening all with the certainty of a reign of peace. In like manner, Professor Massi tells of that proud April evening when the Pontiff, after a long exile, once more looked down upon the earth from his own Olympus. The clerical writers do not exactly call it heaven, but content themselves with speaking of the figure of the Pope so exalted, as " standing between earth and heaven," or as a spectacle which reminds us of the Divinity (Frond, p. 16). The secularizing of sacred terms, tiU we come down to " apostolic corteges " and " apostolic horses," and the materializing of spiritual terms, tiU " the kingdom of Christ," sometimes means the temporal power, is a process which must go on until the heaven of the 1 Life of Const., hb. iii. cap. 6. 1 Geschichte der Stadt Rom. ii. p. 6o. A GREAT REJOICING 265 materialized imagination wiU be leveUed to the height of the noblest dome, and to the beauties of the best decorator. The peerless piazza of St. Peter's was, on the day in question, fiUed with French uniforms. At the foot of the great stair case rose a platform covered with purple, and decked with flying banners. The heavens, aU day covered with clouds, suddenly turned azure, and the setting sun poured his beams on the dome of Michael Angelo, on the cross of the Obelisk, and on the statues which adorn the Colonnade, just as Pius IX " raised his paternal hand to bless the arms which had avenged his throne." The third day on which the sun shone expressly for Pius IX has been already mentioned, that of the Immaculate Conception. It was not only, as some say, the nuns, but also priests and litterateurs who took it as both indispensable and certain that St. Peter's should be bathed in the brightest gold the skies could send on the day which was to unite three glories — the anniversary of the Immaculate, the opening of the General Council, and the probable acclamation of Pius IX as infaUible. On December 7, when the mid-day gun was fired from St. Angelo's, a peal of joybells rang out from more than four hundred churches. From the distant Coelian came the deep note of the Lateran, floating over Coliseum and Capitol ; from the Esquiline came that of Santa Maria Maggiore, floating over the Quirinal. These two met the boom of St. Peter's swinging across the Tiber, and, blending with it, formed, in that sea of sound, a rolling base for the billows, on whose crests every variety of beU-note clashed and sparkled. Far beyond the gates, the lone and beautiful St. Paul's lifted up its voice, as if bidding the untflled plains to teU the unfre quented shore that there was joy in the cloister capital. Hints from Jesuit pens lead us to see some of the Order standing on the Janiculum, by S. Pietro in Montorio, drink ing in the view of the renowned panorama, while the impres sions of years would be brought to a focus by the sensations of a moment. Every thriU would be taken either for a proof or a promise. Things done by the Order were being glorified, 266 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE things to be done were being assured by the voice of many churches. Before memory would rise the figures of HUde brand, Dominic, Ignatius, iUuminated by the imagination of the past. Before hope would rise the figure of the new HUdebrand, with his now unlimited sceptre, and new Loyolas and Dominies, iUuminated by the imagination of the future. Other German Henrys would be seen standing in penance, other English Johns signing away their supremacy ; and surely if at Ingolstadt the Order had trained a Ferdinand II, another could now be trained, and the Virgin and St. Ignatius would not fail to raise up a more successful Tilly, and a more faithful WaUenstein. " Be wise now therefore, O ye kings ; be instructed, ye judges of the earth," would seem ringing with articulate speech from the tongue of every bell. As the Ave Maria sounded in the sunset, the guns of S. Angelo saluted the happy eve. The Pope rode in state to the Church of the Twelve Apostles, and the crowd lined the entire way. The Jesuit writers heard enthusiastic cheers at every point. Some partial iUuminations were attempted, but the weather was unfavourable. This, however, damped not the spirits of any one, for there was to be a glorious iUumination on the morrow, when the rain was bound to cease. M. VeuUlot, buoyant as were his spirits, admitted that, with all his love for Rome, he could not deny that it rains there in winter. But hope was exulting, enthusiasm unbounded. The prepara tion of ideas had, it was thought, done its work ; the restora tion of facts was now not far off. The Civiltd asks, Did ever CouncU meet under such a Pope, with his graces and his virtues, his rich experience, his burden of palms won in incessant victories over the enemies of Christ ; the restorer of the hierarchy in two nations, the founder of many dioceses ; the conqueror of the fallacies, hypocrisies, and fraudulence of the politicasters of our day, the glorifier of the Virgin, who " sensibly " covers him with her mantle, and takes dehght in twining roses with the thorns whereof the tiara that crowns him is altogether composed ? *- The words of a French layman 1 Serie VII. vol. ix. p. 21. AMBROSE AND THE KINGS 267 equal those of the Italian Jesuit. It is again the Count Henri de Riancey who cries, " The Father of the Fathers, Sovereign Pontiff of the Bishops, refuge of the bishops ; he is the Universal Patriarch, the Prefect of the house of God, the Guardian of the vineyard of the Lord. He it is who confirms the faith of Christians ; he is Abraham in his patriarchate, Melchisedek in order, Moses in authority, Samuel in jurisdiction, Peter in power, Christ in unction " (Frond, i. p. xxx.). It was St. Ambrose's day. M. VeuUlot, in imagination, saw the saint " appear on the threshold on which the eyes of the human species are fixed, full of hope," But M. Veuillot seldom meets with a saint, dead or living, but a political end soon appears. This was, he cries, a felicitous rencounter. What made it so ? When Ambrose had become bishop, he excommunicated the Emperor Theodosius for the crime of inhumanity. His image in this act is to M. VeuUlot evidently the prototype of Pius IX leaving the kings out of the CouncU. But it is one thing to refuse the Communion, which was open for the humblest believer, to the greatest potentate alive, because his word has wantonly handed his subjects over to death ; and it is another thing to refuse to all believers in existence a place, even as hearers, in the chamber where new laws binding them and their children for ever are to be decreed. The scene at Milan, and that at St. Peter's, similar to the ardent Ultramontane, would strike us rather by contrast. On the former threshold we see a Christian pastor guarding the Lord's Table. On the latter, a king, and an aspirant after universal pohtical supremacy, guarding the secret of his own counsels. Outside the Milan threshold we see one sinner in purple, whUe the common Christians are free to approach. Outside the Vatican are all members of Churches whom the king in purple and scarlet acknowledges as members of his own Church. The people are disfranchised with the princes at their head. The priests had long been losing their franchise in the election of their bishops. More recently they had been losing their freehold in their parishes. When the Jesuits obtained possession of Pius IX, the parish priest had a hfe 268 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE interest in his parish subject to good behaviour. But this formed too much of a tie to the nation. The parochial clergy had to be mobflized. So, graduaUy, they had been put into berths only by temporary appointment, and held the place ad nutum, at the nod of the bishop. They had been glad that the sword in the hand of the king should not be in his power, but at the nod of the priest. It was scarcely so pleasant that the parish, in' the hand of the priest, should be at the nod of the bishop. The making of it so had already to a large extent been accomplished. It was now to be completed ; but those tyrannous kings might attempt to check the move by what they would call protecting the lower clergy, what the Vatican would call destroying the liberty of the Church. The whole spirit of the Jesuit Press at this period indicated that the Modern State had so wearied out the Vatican that the only chance for kings to make their peace with it would lie in separating their cause from that of parliaments and constitutions. If they meant to be tolerated long after the Council, they must not only reign but govern — govern Catholic States under the SyUabus. A ruler by divine right — which among the baptized means one instituted by the Pope and corrected by him — is the essence of the matter. " The Pope and the People ! " is the last exclamation of M. VeuiUot, on the eve of the day when the nations were to come to judg ment — on the eve of the day when the salutary conspiracy recommended by the Civiltd with its first breath was to hold its crowning conclave, when the holy Crusade, heralded with the same breath, was to receive both its legal warrant and its world-wide impulse. A triumphal arch was to mark the completion of a stage of toU and the entrance upon a stage of transformation. " The Pope and the People. I believe that these words are invisibly written on the door of this Vatican CouncU, which door forms the entrance to a new world ; rather is it a triumphal arch erected on the rediscovered highway of the human race." 1 That triumphal arch and that rediscovered way of the 1 Vol, i. p. 14 JESUIT MORALS AND THE NEW WORLD 269 human species which, to M. VeuUlot, made the entrance to the Vatican CouncU sublime, invested it, to the eyes of Liberal Catholics, with clouds of doubtful omen. The triumph vaunted was real and even stupendous, but it was a triumph over the principles in the name of which Liberal Catholics had fought and won the battles of the Church. The rediscovered way was no other than the broad road of clerical dominion over spiritual and temporal things which, in the ages before the Reformation, had led the Church down to a degree of corruption now denied by none — a broad road, which had since then been swept and mended, but to which had in the mean time been added the countless sidepaths of Jesuit morals. If aU those sidepaths should by authority be opened for the winding and the straying of human guUe and passion, what would the Catholic nations come to ? Studious Liberal Catholics were aware of the two sides of the Jesuit system of morals, whereof Protestants generally were cognizant only of one. These knew, indeed, that a lawful end renders the means to it lawful ; but Liberal Catholics knew that it was also taught that an unlawful end did not infect with guilt the means by which it had been reached, provided only that in themselves those means consisted of acts not necessarily unlawful. Thus on both sides — that of seeking a lawful end by unlawful means, and that of employing lawful means for an unlawful end — was the gate made wider, the road broader, and the way more smooth for guile to creep or passion to roU downward, but attended aU along by the comforts of absolution, and sprinkled with holy water.1 And as to the new world to which the Council was to be an entrance, Liberal Catholics had seen the Pope's special college of writers, in the Civiltd, dweU upon the act whereby Alexander VI drew a line from pole to pole, and gave to Spain aU regions that should be discovered to the west of it, and to 1 See Gury, especially his Casus Conscientiae. A smaU duodecimo Doctrina Moralis Jesuitarum (CeUe, 1874), gives copious extracts from Jesuit authors with a German translation. For the EngUsh reader, Mr. Cartwright's work on the Jesuits suppUes a good outline. 270 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Portugal all those that should be discovered to the east of it ; and contend that the Pope, in saying of those regions, I give, concede, and assign them to this king and to that, acted simply as the Vicar of Christ ; nay, that by that act the autonomy of the Indians was not in the least offended ; and that, moreover, what in the jargon of infidel and of heretics was called the pretensions of Rome, was nothing else but the exercise of a clear and sublime right, resorted to by the Pope in seeking a solid protection, in new countries, for the autonomy of nations and of individuals, when otherwise, to the offence of religion, it might have been violated by barbarians.1 But was this supreme power to dispose by sentence of the lot of nations, even though unknown, without in so doing offending in the least against their rights, to be exalted into eternal dogma ? If so, and if mankind would endure it, weU might the door of the CouncU be regarded as the entrance to a new world. But whether future ages wiU reckon it as the entrance to a new world or not, we are about to see that it was indeed the entrance to an arena on which was to be witnessed a process of revolution from above and a struggle of priest with priest, — a process as instructive, a struggle as curious, as any that our age has produced, among its many transformations of polity and redistributions of power. 1 VI. i. 662-80. BOOK III FROM THE OPENING OF THE COUNCIL TO THE INTRO DUCTION OF THE QUESTION OF INFALLIBILITY CHAPTER I The First Session, December 8, 1869, or Opening Ceremony — Muster ing — Robing — -The Procession — The Anthem and Mass — The Sermon — The Act of Obedience — The Allocution — The Incensing — Passing Decrees — The Te Deum — Appreciations of various Wit nesses. AT dawn, on Wednesday, December 8, 1869, the guns of Fort St. Angelo saluted the long looked for day, while from the other side of the Tiber those of the Aventine replied. The beUowing of these beasts of war awoke the city to witness a CouncU of the ministers of peace. As the sounds reached the ear of peasant, monk, and nun, already plodding in the dark from places outside the walls, the sky was low, and pouring down a truly Roman rain. Unlike towns round which smiling homes are sown broadcast outside of the bounds, Rome, when approached by most of the routes, first shows the city walls, and not till a good whUe later does it show the beginning of habit ations. The poor suburbs which he outside a few of the gates are less dreary than the space inside, where lonely roads, shut in by blank walls, lead amidst crumbhng mementoes of rulers of the world, and marks of the actual reign of drones not able to master ordinary difficulties. Every now and then comes a church, or one of the two hundred and more convents and nunneries which sanctify the place. But scarcely any of these have an outline such as to yield, in twUight, the effect of either Gothic spires or Moorish minarets, or even of good Grecian colonnades. Many a cowled figure struggled under the drenching rain along these desolate ways. One would pass the spot where 271 272 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Peter was arrested by his Master, when the Fisherman uttered the famous " Lord, whither goest Thou ? " and was turned back to Rome to die. Another would pass by the vale of Egeria and he might weU wonder if Numa ever had to seek inspira tion there in such dismal gloom. Crossing the open ground about the Lateran, some of the monks might think of the terrible morn when TotUa, in mercy, halted his troops inside the gates, sending the clang of his trumpets through the dark, aU over the city, to give the wretched Romans the chance of flight. Other monks coming from St. Agnese, and entering by the Porta Pia, would reflect upon the adornment of that gate by the Holy Father, and upon its happy name which links it both with Pius IX and with its own founder. Its founder, Pius IV, signed the Creed of the Council of Trent, and Pius IX was to sign the new Creed of the Council of the Vatican. This beautiful coincidence would, with the monks, make the gate an emblem of the Church, against which the gates of heU should never prevail. If they only happened to recollect that its old name Nomentana marked it as the Mentana Gate, the encouraging impression would rise almost to the brightness of a revelation. The day, only two years before, when, the con quering crusaders marched in, and the welkin rang with shouts of " Long live Pius IX ! " " Long live the zouaves ! " " Long hve the Crusaders ! " " Long live Cathohc France ! " would return to memory as the pledge of mightier Mentanas. Had an invisible hand drawn aside the veU, and shown them that gate, some nine months later, admitting the Italian troops, followed by the dog Pio drawing a little cart fuU of Bibles ; and then shown, still later, the residence of a British Am bassador to the King of Italy inside the gate, and on the out side the residence of Garibaldi, the monks would have vowed by aU the saints, old and new, that the vision came from a lying spirit. Some, again, crossing the Tiber by the MUvian Bridge, would, in spite of the blinding rain, see the figure of Constantine victoriously dominating the heights, and that of Maxentius LOCAL ASSOCIATIONS 273 being hurled into the stream. A while afterwards, when pass ing near the Broken Wall, where St. Peter himself had kept watch, and with his own hand had blinded and routed the Goths, they would feel that now when his successor was to be at last duly exalted, the Apostle would surely keep the city more jealously than before ; and if there was need of a Beli- sarius to crush the Italian barbarians, the Lord would raise him up at the intercession of Peter. As they came further inwards, the crowds of the city were already in motion. Down from the Coelian and Esquiline were they pouring past the Cohseum, reflecting men delighting in the thought that aU high things which exalt themselves against the Church would fall into her power just as the Coliseum had done ; for the " high things " of the Romanized imagination are naturaUy material ones. The Arch of Titus, darkly outlined in the morning grey, would be the prophetic pledge that the Jews, however stubborn, would yield to the Pontiff at last. But where was the golden candlestick — where the temple vessels ? After Genseric carried them off, had they ever returned ? The ruinous Palatine would symbolize woes coming to modern Caesars, as sure as those which had crushed the ancient ones. Indeed, it is not impossible that some would see visions like those seen by monks of yore, who be held the soul of the great Theodoric dragged into the crater of Stromboli. From the Aventine, where Peter resided with PrisciUa and Aquila, and which is now little but a site for monastic estab lishments, many would come, passing by the place where once stood the Circus Maximus. The thoughtful would there have in their eye the grand spectacles of Pagan Rome. It was by a spectacle that Romulus aUured the Sabines to unity by violence ; and it was by a spectacle that Pius IX was now wooing the world to wedlock with the Papacy— ready, if only able, to take short measures with the coy. But what were the shows of the old rude times to this ? What if three hundred thousand pairs of eyes did gleam together on the spectacles which, with bread, made up the earthly aU of the 18 274 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Roman plebs ? They never had looked upon such an array of holy bishops, from the whole earth, as would be seen to-day. The colours for which they went mad, their idolized blues and greens, were but few, and Ul-combined, compared with the colours now about to be displayed. The ancient cry, " Bread and Spectacles ! " was indeed stiU kept alive by Roman author ities, but was to-day to be satisfied in a Christian style glorious beyond Pagan example. Along the Via Sacra few foreigners would appear, but from the Capitohne Germans would set out. It is natural to think of some student, fresh from the pages of Gregorovius, his im agination vividly setting face to face the ancient Rome and the actual. He would think of the exclamation, " Renowned, queenly, immeasurable Rome, a sea of beauty surpassing all power of speech ! " Where were the glory and the beauty now ? Inside the churches and palaces indeed were masses Of decoration and artistic stores of wealth, but the city viewed, on that dismal December morning, as a city, was poor and Ul- kept. The glory which once compeUed men at this central point to caU her Golden Rome was departed. What now represented the Temple of Jupiter — its piUars on gilded bases with gUded capitals, its gates of gilded bronze, and its roof of tiles of gUded brass? There stands the Church of the Aracoeli ; Jupiter is succeeded by the Bambino, a doU, carved by St. Luke, which is driven in a stately carriage round the city to the beds of the dying. Crossing the Bridge of Sixtus the student might see vividly, as students do, the scene of that sacrUegious morning when the lone old stream, with no Horatius now, was breasted by swarthy boatmen swinging the oar with the stroke of the rover, and as each galley shot out of the bend of the Aventine, the chief, from under his turban, eyed the opening prospect of plunder with the glance of an Ishmaelite. When they rifled the grave, would the student say, if they found anything of the Fisherman, certainly they did not leave anything. If the ashes of Peter ever did rest there, were they not sent by the Saracens to await those of Wycliffe in the sea ? THE JEWS IN ROME 275 A pamphlet, by a Hebrew, with the title of The Ghetto and Rome's Great Show, reminds us that from under the flank of the Capitoline some would come out of the pen in which the Popes had, for ages, shut up the children of Israel. No doubt some travelled Rabbi would do so. Such a man would have mentally dwelt all his life among the ancients, and personaUy he would have seen the Pyramids and Thebes, the Tomb of Abraham, with Jerusalem, Baalbec, and probably the Remains upon the Euphrates, if not those on the Tigris. To him Roman dates were modern, and Roman monuments, though great for Europe, were on a scale comparatively small, not equalling in magnitude those of Asia, not approaching in grace those of HeUas. In his eye aU the princes of the ancient monarchies laughed at the notion of Gregorovius, that the idea of a world-empire originated with the Romans — nay, no more than did the idea of the Trojan War. Towards Pius IX personaUy the feehng of the Jew would be rather kindly, for he, like Sixtus V, had relieved the Hebrews from some of the severities to which they had long been sub jected by preceding Popes. But this would not prevent the whole tormented past from rising in memory before the Rabbi and stirring him to hope that he might now be going to wit ness the last show ever to be exhibited by on«s of the cruel race of the Pope-Kings. The pen in which his people had been shut up, the distinguishing badge, the differential taxes, the religious worry, and the manifold enormities committed upon them in the name of Christ who loved them, of Peter who lived for them, and of Paul who gave himself repeatedly to death for them, had long helped to set him and his on hating Christ, and Peter, and Paul. " Hard as their lot was under the Caesars," says our pamphlet, " it became harder stUl when the ecclesiastical Head was crowned by Pepin Le Bref king of the States of the Church, and actuaUy ruler of the world." The day was now past when the Corso, in carnival- time, rang with the shouts of so-called Christians, haUing the spectacle of Jews naked, except a girdle round the loins and ropes round their necks, forced to run races against riderless 276 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE mules, and asses, and buffaloes. For a long time this service had been performed for the sacred city by riderless horses, goaded by spiked baUs slashing into their sides. Neverthe less, those former days would rise up before the Rabbi's eye, as would also the price paid for ransom. As he passed along, between him and the Corso stood the one pUe stUl entire which to memory represented the Pagan Romanism under which his first ancestors in the city had suffered, and to the eye repre sented the Papal Romanism under which their descendants had continued for so many ages to groan. Dedicated by Agrippa to Cybele and all the gods, it had been rededicated by Boniface IV to Mary and all the martyrs. Though stUl best known as the Pantheon, its name in Rome is St. Mary of the Rotunda. Our Rabbi would naturaUy, on such an occasion, compare it as it had been and as it now is ; for the associations of the day would suggest to his mind that gathering of the provincials in the plain of Dura, when some of his forefathers had to bear witness against the longing natural to those who imagine themselves heads of the human species, to set up new idols, and to insist on unity by means more urgent than godly. That was the first clearly recorded scene in the fiery drama of Catholic Unity ; a unity bending, breaking, or burning aU nations, peoples, and tongues into religious and political sub mission to one human head. Probably the Rabbi would admit that there was some ground of justice in the words of Joseph de Maistre, that the Pantheon had been devoted to all the vices, and now was devoted to all the virtues. Thus far the Christian element in Papal Romanism had asserted its moral superiority. But the Rabbi would feel that there was exaggeration upon both sides of De Maistre's assertion. The gods of the Pagans were not all personified vices, any more than are now aU those of the Hindus. Many of them were so, and that is enough. On the other hand, not aU the saints of the Papal Pantheon represent personified virtues, judged by any code but the sad one of the Popes themselves. The Rabbi would hardly recognize St. Peter Arbues, red with THE SAINTS AND THE GODS 277 the blood of thousands of the seed of Abraham, as one of the Virtues, any more than as one of the Graces. He would, however, recognize the correctness of Joseph De Maistre's estimate of the kind of change made by the Popes in the Pantheon. He would also admit the good judgment of M. Fisquet in selecting the following passage of De Maistre, when describing the ceremonies of Rome for Frond's history—1 It is in the Pantheon that Paganism is rectified and brought back to the primitive system, of which it is only a visible corruption. The name of God is exclusive and incommunicable. Neverthe less, there are many gods, in heaven and in earth. There are intelligences, better natures of deified men (hommes divinises). The gods of Christianity are the saints. Around God are assembled all the gods, to serve Him in the place and order assigned to them. The Rabbi might say, The Law pulls down the word " gods," by applying it to magistrates, thus making it mean little ; but these ignorant priests lift it up to mean something more than the Pagans ever did mean by it, as if the latter had imagined that each god was a supreme being, or something near it. De Maistre, however, had more sense. He knew that " saints " was another name for gods, only they were not to be vicious, which was no doubt the original idea.2 1 Frond, iii., p. 254. M. Fisquet is author of the work Gallia Chris tiana, in fifty volumes. 2 The Hindu Bhagavad Gita thus represents the distinction between God and the gods. " I behold, O God ! within Thy heart the dews (gods) assembled, and every specific tribe of beings. I see Brahma (the creator, only a god) sitting on his lotus throne, all the Reeshees, and heavenly Ooragas. ... I see Thee without beginning, without middle, and without end. . . . The space between the heavens and the earth is possessed by Thee alone, and every point around. ... Of the celestial bands, some fly to Thee for refuge ; whilst some, afraid with joined hands sing forth Thy praise. The Maharshees holy bands hail Thee " ; and then follows an enumeration of various orders of celestials, who " all stand gazing on Thee, aU alike amazed."* While thus Hinduism long anticipated either Pagan or Papal Roman ism, in a system of inferior worship to inferior powers, it more logically attached inferior paradises to such worship. " Those who worship the Devatas (gods) go unto the Devatas ; those who worship the Patriarchs * Wilkins' translation, Garrett's ed., pp. 54, 55. 278 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE 1 By this time the dull and dripping air would begin to vibrate with the roU of carriages. Both in the rain and under cover, the throng was pouring towards one point. From the poor streets, where once stretched the glorious Fora of the Caesars, from the old Suburra, from the regions covered by the gardens of SaUust, from the spot where the persecuting name of Diocletian and a splendid church are now locally associated, from aU the flanks of the Quirinal, would the stream come pouring towards the old Field of Mars. Bishops, artists, and the models of the artists, priests and beggars, quaint peasants, handsome artisans, well-dressed tradesmen, pressed in slush and silence past the lone pUlar of Trajan, nobly sad, standing amidst memories of might and signs of impotence. In the crowd speckled by ecclesiastical and peasant costumes, many an English figure, both home and colonial, steadily made way, and many an American one, and a few of the swarthy South Americans. At least one Scotch bonnet and plaid pushed through the throng.1 And he who wore them saw the well-known cap of the German student. Though, in general, not much addicted to attend solemnities, the Roman shop keeper would on this occasion be well represented. His motto had hardly been " Bread and Shows," but rather " Shows and Bread." The city had, to a considerable extent, lived upon its exhibitions ; and every grand one designed by the priests raised them in the eyes of shopkeepers, lodging-keepers, and cabmen.2 The grand Piazza of St. Peter's would have been at its grandest that day had the sky been true to the Papacy. No thing but the heavens failed. From every opening into the Piazza flowed the eager crowds. They passed the two hun dred and eighty columns, natives sheltering under their go unto the Patriarchs ; the servants of the spirits go to the spirits ; and they who worship me go unto me."* That is sensible as a poUty, if fallen as a religion. But it may be doubtful whether those who worship the Inquisitors would like to go to the Inquisitors. 1 Dr. Philip, author of The Ghetto and Rome's Great Show. See Liverani at full. • Ibid., p. 46. THE PROCESSION TO ST. PETER'S 279 umbreUas, strangers compeUed by admiration to look up. They passed the Obelisk, those who had history in their memory, thinking of Nero and of the scenes by him enacted. They passed the Inquisition, perhaps wondering what priests were imprisoned now, and if there were any bishops, and who ; perhaps thinking how strange it was that side by side should stand the memorials of Nero and the chambers of the Inquisition. Then up the steps and across the Portico. At the same time, the coaches of the great swept to the right into the Vatican. About three hundred of these were splendidly horsed, gUt round the top, gilt at all avaUable points, hung high on springs, with four or five servants, in yellow and blue, red and green, embroidered, powdered, and in cocked hats. The few pensive monuments of retrospective royalty that still clave to the skirt of the Pontiff, formed the first line of this array. Then came the thrice-splendid princes of the Church. Each rode in his state carriage, followed, says Frond (vol. vii. p. 91), by a second carriage, " less sumptuous." and if a prince — we presume by birth — followed by a third. Then came the nuncios, ambassadors, bishops, and notabilities with starry breasts, and ribbons like streamers among the stars — stars that dazzle Romans far more than aU the consteUations in the sky. The Roman nobles, always splendid, were that day in their fulness of gold, and pearls, and costly array ; and their equipages are said to have counted several hundreds. No less than five hundred private ones and some two thousand street carriages completed the train. Roman ecclesiastics could not help remarking, even in print, that from a one-horse hackney coach might be seen alighting a couple of bishops, and four from a two-horse one ; a sight which they contrasted with the princely splendour of Constance and of Trent. At the bridge of St. Angelo, and at other important points, rose up in the rain the mounted figures of the Papal dragoons in their long white cloaks. A plentiful display of soldiers, said to amount to about six thousand, increased the variety. Black- clad Barnabite, and brown Franciscan, broad-hatted Jesuit and white Camaldolese, with aU the costumes of the barrack, 280 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE the convent, the nunnery, mingled with those of the drawing- room and the viUage festival, spangled the thickening crowd. The clergy of the city had early assembled in sufficient number to line the whole course of the procession, untU it reached the statue of St. Peter. Within, the crowd is not represented by any writer as having been excessive. Some say that the church was full, some that it was not quite so. The people arrived in wet clothing, and as none of them, least of aU the monks, were given to excessive ablutions, even the correspondent of the Stimmen aus Maria Laach aUuded to the quality of the air. So also did the Special Correspon dent of the Times ; but he remarked that " incense covers a multitude of perfumes." In the various side chapels, Masses were being celebrated, each priest, as he came up to the altar, or retired from it, being preceded by two soldiers under arms, and foUowed by one. There were upon duty in that temple of peace, opened for a great councU of peace, one battalion of zouaves and one of the line. The soldiers of Diocletian and Galerius, when beginning their work one February morning, whUe the two Emperors watched them from their palace windows in Nicomedia, would not have been so much at a loss had they entered a temple like St. Peter's, as they found themselves in the Christian church into which they then broke. " They searched in vain," says Gibbon, " for some visible object of worship. They were obliged to content themselves with committing to the flames the volumes of the Holy Scriptures." They could have found no Bible in St. Peter's to burn, unless they had taken to a sumptuous book, in a dead language, containing portions of the Gospels. But they would not have searched in vain for visible objects of worship. Just as even Father Abraham had been turned into chief idol in the Caaba by the heathen Arabs, so here the chief of the images set up was Peter. But never had he been so dressed in Galilee or Jerusalem, in Antioch or Babylon, with alb, girdle, stole, and tiara. The Popes might have UI copied the living Peter, but the bronze Peter had weU copied the Popes. The Fisherman would have been ADORATION OF ST. PETER 281 surprised at his own pluvial. As clerical writers would blush not to teU, it was of red sUk, striped with gold. On his breast was a golden cross ; on his right hand a golden ring, with a large ruby, and a circle of " flashing brilliants," and the left hand held a golden key aU decked with precious stones. Be fore him burned a lamp, and four superb wax candles painted like the iUuminations of books. As aU men honour their gods with what they value most, the Vatican honours Peter by feeding the jeweUer and laceman in his soul with marrow and fatness, and by the sight of men kissing his feet. Peter had his faults, but he never deserved to be so paganized. True, he did forget himself when he got into the palace of the Jewish priest, but not in the same way as the bishop on the Tiber forgot himself when he got into the palace of the Roman Pontiff. That, however, was Peter before he was converted. Peter, after he was converted, passed the threshold of a Roman. Then, he strengthened his brethren, not by lording it either over their persons or their faith, but by teaching a lesson in action, to the effect that no human being should ever degrade his person before a feUow-man, and that the forms of worship, as weU as the spirit of it, are to be reserved for Him whom alone it is lawful for the offspring of God to adore. Peter would not break the commandment that said, " Be not ye called rabbi : for one is your Master, even Christ ; and all ye are brethren. And caU no man your father upon the earth : for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters : for one is your Master, even Christ " (Matt, xxiii. 8-10). There in a nutsheU lies the whole theory of a direct govern ment as against one by proxy ; of a father's government of adult sons, as against a master's government of slaves through upper servants ; of one all-watching love, and one aU-working care, as against an imperial reclusion that leaves affairs to departmental divinities. " Our Father which art in heaven," deeper is Thy love to the least of us, more tender and closer far than could be that of any patron whom we might set up ! In numbering the hairs of our heads, no Vicar dost Thou employ ! In drawing near to Thee, no mterest of Thy freedmen 282 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE do we require, for we are no longer slaves, but in Thy love, the love of a Father, dost thou invite every one of us to the adoption and therefore to the access of sons ! He, who had once shaken his brethren, did not afterwards strengthen tliem by teUing them that they must aU accept him as rabbi, father, and master in the absence of their Lord, while to him there was but one Master, Christ. Just as Peter was ready, in his own person, to keep the commandment, "Be not ye caUed masters," so would he have been the very first to uphold the corresponding commandment, " CaU no man mas ter." He well knew that this applied pointedly and particularly to the ministers and disciples of the religion of Christ as such ; for he was one of the first to teach both due reverence and due obedience to that civU authority which the Popes live to make little more than a sword under their own power. The Italian Protestant and the Rabbi would both watch the thousands performing the adoration of St. Peter. The Italian Protestant would think of rites to Romulus, or perhaps to Hercules, whose local story was still more mythical. The Rabbi would think with scorn of the impossibUity of such a spectacle in a synagogue over a dressed-up image of Aaron, for the Jews had never reformed the decalogue. He would mentaUy quote Jeremiah : " The stock is a doctrine of vanities. Silver spread into plates is brought from Tarshish, and gold from Uphaz, the work of the workman, and of the hands of the founder ; blue and purple is their clothing, they are aU the work of cunning men."1 Educated Hindus are now often to be seen in Rome. Any of them who witnessed this scene, and heard priests complacently point out the distinctions by which simple Westerns are luUed into the notion that this is theoreticaUy a different kind of worship from that paid to lesser gods and to images by Brahmans, would take the distinctions in his supple fingers and snap them as easily as he would so many threads of the finest Dacca looms. The Pundits were in this, as in many things, elder and abler brethren of the priests. Friedrich, in his Doctor's robes, formed one of the pro- 1 Chap. x. 8, 9- DIFFERENT CLASSES PRESENT 283 miscuous crowd ; for mere theologians in Rome did not pass for much. No one has told us where Quirinus stood, or what was his toUet. It is not even clear whether his spirit was vested in a German or an English frame, although probabUities are in favour of the latter. ViteUeschi was there too, with his Roman familiarity with men, forms, and projects. And there was Lord Acton, the Roman Marchese, brother to a bishop, soon to be a Cardinal ; the English Baron nephew to a Car dinal. M. Frond would be in exceedingly great glory. M. VeuiUot, frightened, he says, by the rain, was in his rooms by the Piazza, di Spagna, describing to the Univers what he caUs " the moral of the ceremony " — a fact which he states long afterwards (i. p. 73). He acknowledges that he did not smeU the odour of the crowd ; but not on that account is he to be told that he did not see the first session. He went to the top of the Pincio about noon, saw the dome and the Vatican wrapped in fog and rain, and the sky laden as if with storms for all time. But he saw the Council as one ought to see it, and as history wiU see it ; and never on the sunniest morning did the hiU of Peter, the mountain where God dweUs, appear more luminous to him. Correspondents of the Civiltd published on the spot, of the Stimmen published on the Rhine, of distant journals in America and the East, were revelling in the Catholicity and brilliancy of the spectacle, and preparing to transmit across the Alps and across the seas some vibration of the transports by which every now and then they were themselves thrilled. The un- tonsured but inevitable correspondents of the profane Press were there, odious in forms unknown. Liberal Catholics from different countries were there in numbers, striving to hope against hope, now thinking of the courage of their national bishops, now of the moderation of the Pontiff ; and now exercising faith in the good stars of the Church, but trusting that, somehow or other, credit to the Catholic cause would result from the Council, instead of Jesuit fighting, foUowed by disaster, which they had too much ground to fear. 284 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE On the other hand, the Jesuits were quietly exulting in the knowledge that the days of the Liberal Catholics were num bered. " Weighed and found wanting " were words often upon their lips at that time. The feeling of the Protestants, of all classes, was chiefly that of curiosity. Such of them as believed that Rome yet retained enough of the Christian element to be capable of reform wished that the Jesuits might fail. Those, on the other hand, who believed that at Trent Rome had written upon herself the doom irreformable, thought that the only thing now before her was to go down deeper into her own errors, and to make herself formally what she long had been virtuaUy, the religion simply of the fait accompli, a system in which each error once committed must enter into the blood, and even form abnormal bone. Perhaps the words " judicial blindness " were never so often quietly uttered by charitable men as then, and during the months ensuing. The tomb of Peter shared with his statue in the honours of the morn. In the ray of its lamps knelt many a figure of " fair women and brave men." The men hoped to rise braver for the coming struggle. The words of the Pontiff were vividly in the memories of the devout — words uttered to five hundred bishops. " We never doubted that a mj-sterious force and salutary virtue emanated from the tomb where repose the ashes of Peter, as a perpetual object of religious veneration to the world ; a force which inspires the pastors of the Lord's flock with bold enterprises, noble spirit, and magnanimous sentiment."1 Pius IX would hardly have seen the force of an inquiry, should any one have dared to make it, whether there was any known case in which one of the Apostles had in Jerusalem sent even the most ignorant of Christians to the tomb of the proto-martyr, ay, or to the tomb of tombs, in order there to seek some blessing that could not be found by going into his own closet, and praying to his Father who seeth in secret. 1 Allocution of June 26, 1867. ASSEMBLING OF THE HIERARCHY 285 The Civiltd, however, gave a more inteUigent turn to this Papal suggestion — It is to be hoped (it said) that this Council, announced on the centehary of St. Peter, convoked by a Bull dated on the day of St. Peter, and assembled round the wonderful tomb of St. Peter, will be par excellence the Council of St. Peter. That means the most obsequious to the prerogatives of Peter, whose divine authority, the centre and foundation of aU social authority, is at the same time that which is most combated by the spirit of the world, accord ing to the words of the Saviour, " The whole world lieth in wicked ness " (1 John v. 19). WhUe the people waited, the bishops were robing in the Julian corridor, and the patriarchs in one of the adjoining apartments. Over the grand portico of St. Peter's is a hall, weU known on Holy Thursday as the place where the twelve apostles celebrate the Supper — the haU in which the five hundred presented their salutation in 1867. This had been converted into a chapel, by the erection of an altar. Here assembled the members of the procession. Each prelate, on completing his costume, made for the haU, but was not per mitted to have any attendant. It being the Day of the Im maculate Conception, the colour of the vestments was white ; a rule, however, which did not bind the Orientals. The cardinals were robing in a room apart. Each of them having done so, entered the hah foUowed by his train-bearer. Bishops, pre lates, and cardinals waited while the Pope robed. This he did in the Pauline Chapel, attended by three cardinals, two bishops, the sub-deacon apostolic, two protonotaries, and a few minor officials. They adorned him with amice and with alb, with girdle and with stole. Then did the cardinal-priest in waiting bring the censer, and the Pope put the incense on. Then did they further array him in the " formal," the pluvial, and the precious mitre. At about half-past nine o'clock, Pius IX, in aU the glory of gems and garments, entered the hall, where between seven and eight hundred bishops stood before the altar, awaiting their royal head. He did not wear either the tiara or the usual golden mitre, but a special precious mitre 286 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE made for the occasion, " This says," ViteUeschi (p. 3), " was to indicate a certain equality with the other bishops, which, however, is confined to these little accessories of the cere monial." The white pluvial was fastened on his breast by an enamelled clasp, about which clerical writers are particular. The clasp was set with jewels in the form of a dove, with outstretched wings, surrounded by a halo of rays, and repre senting the Holy Ghost. The Pope passed among the Fathers holding out his fingers, in the usual manner, on this side and on that, giving them what is grotesquely called the pontifical bene diction. Then kneeling at the faldstool he took off his mitre and prayed. Two cardinals, approaching the kneeling Pontiff, placed a book before his eyes. He looked upon it, lifted up his aged but resounding voice, and sang — Creator Spirit, come ! This strain was taken up by the choir, and the first verse was sung, aU kneeling. The Pontiff then rose, put on his mitre, and was seated in his portative throne. The portative throne is a contrivance for exhibiting a dignitary to the gaze of a multitude, which does not remind one of anything to be seen elsewhere in Europe, but does strongly remind one of the way in which a great Guru is carried in India. It is a gorgeous litter, on which is placed a gorgeous chair, under a gorgeous canopy, called a Baldachino. In the chair is seated the Pontiff. Men robed in crimson bear the litter ; others bear the canopy on long gUded decorated poles, and beside it others bear gigantic fans of peacocks' feathers. Even in a secular procession, more serious than an election triumph, this sort of chairing would be of doubtful taste ; but in a religious act, above aU an act done in the house of God, it would be impossible, except where the aesthetic of faith had expired, and the aesthetic of thought had long surrendered to the aesthetic of sensation. As the Pontiff was set on high a shot fired from St. Angelo told the waiting multitude that the procession was formed. We have said that the clergy of the city lined the whole THE PROCESSION 287 course of the procession on either side. This extended from the door of the hall, through some of the apartments of the Vatican, down the celebrated Royal Staircase, through the magnificent portico of St. Peter's, up the nave to the statue of the Apostle, then to the altar at his grave, and finaUy, to the right of that altar, into the hall of the Council. As the head of the procession emerged from the haU, the manifold costumes of the clergy formed the skirting of the lofty walls, in the apartments through which it slowly swept. The most noticeable of these was the Royal HaU, Sala Regia, where frescoes, suggestive of more swords than one, appealed, by Papal memories, to Papal hopes. There was Gregory VII giving absolution to the penitent emperor Henry IV. There was the attack upon Tunis in 1553, there the massacre of St. Bartholomew's, the League against the Turks, and Barbarosas receiving the benediction of the Pope in the Piazza of St. Mark. From the Royal Hall descends the Royal Staircase Scala Regia. All down its two flights the reverent clergy lined the way, as the " Church Princes " swept by. In the lower flight the Ionic capitals of the colonnade gracefuUy lengthened out the perspective, while the stately march of mitres glanced between the shafts. With a supreme sense of the importance of the act did the train pass down the noble stair ; each prelate no less sustaining the dignity of the moment because just then the eye of the outer world beheld them not. In the view of a real Vaticanist a great procession is a good in itself, and a very high good, apart from its uses ; or, perhaps more properly, it is felt that its effectiveness for use whoUy depends upon the sense of discipline in its members. Finally the foot of the stair was reached. The portative throne passed the statue of Constantine, the first who ever drew sword for the Church. It swept round and faced the statue of Charlemagne, the first upon whose head the Church ever set imperial crown. Each stood at an end of the magnificent vista formed by the portico — grand watchers at the door of the Pontiff, ever teUing that the kings whom his Church wants are not merely nursing fathers but champions in fight. As 288 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE the sight of their uplifted monarch burst upon the people, and that of the people upon their king, the heavy guns from the Aventine were firing alternately with those of St. Angelo, while all the beUs were trying to exceed the joypeal of the preceding day. Before his Holiness reached this point, the pro cession had already entered the nave in slowand gorgeous order. In front came chamberlains, chaplains, and officials of sixteen ascending grades. After these came the Fathers of the CouncU, — first the generals of orders, next mitred abbots, and then foUowed bishops, archbishops, primates, and patriarchs, in succession of stiU ascending rank, every man in appropriate splendour. The Orientals outshone their western brethren even more than usual ; for the robes of the Latins, being confined to the white of the day, were at a disadvantage be side the eastern coats of many colours. The Senator, as the incumbent is called of a quaint old office under the Papal government, which we might caU that of honorary mayor of Rome, marched between the prelates and the throne in golden robe of rich variety. He was accompanied by the conserva tors, whom we might caU something like honorary councUmen, and also by the commandants of the three orders of guards — the noble, the Palatine, and the Swiss. FinaUy, sitting aloft, with the fans and the bearers, and the poles and the canopy, came the Pontiff. The moving throne was foUowed by a lengthened rear procession, formed of sundry officials, and closing with the priests, who had for some time been practising shorthand, in order to act as reporters. The faithful from east and west gazed with enraptured eyes. Many were proud to recognize their own bishops ; some stiU prouder to see their own gifts in robe or gem shining among the adornments of the day. Any Hindu present, looking at priest and soldier, might have exclaimed in the words of the Bhagavad Gtta : " Many a wondrous sight, many a heavenly ornament, many an upraised weapon ; adorned with celestial robes and chaplets ; anointed with heavenly essence, covered with every marveUous thing." l 1 Wilkins' translation, Garrett's triglot edition, Bangalore, p. S3- THE PROCESSION 289 From early morn, " the holiest," to use the term of one of the priestly descriptions, had been exhibited upon the altar ; but out of tenderness to the throng had been veUed tUl the procession approached. As it entered the temple, every mem ber of it uncovered to " the holiest." Those who were not members of the CouncU, after reaching the high altar, defiled to the left. The Fathers of the CouncU approaching the altar, each in his turn bent the knee before the Host ; and then turning to the right, beheld the front of the CouncU Hall erected between two of the piers which sustain the great dome of Michael Angelo. Over the door was a picture, professing to represent the Eternal Father. The door was kept by the mUitary figures of the Knights of Malta and the noble guards. Each prelate, in turn, entered the hall, bowed to the cross erected upon the altar, and was shown to the place assigned to him, according to his rank and seniority ; for care was taken that the bishops should not group themselves either according to nation or according to opinion. There, standing and bareheaded, they awaited the Holy Father (Frond, vii. p. 98). After the procession had been for some time moving up the nave, a whisper, " The cross, the cross," passed from lip to lip. The cross was borne immediately in front of the Fathers of the CouncU. Priest told priest of its choice beauty and immense costliness. Designed in the Gothic of the thirteenth century, and rich with gems, it represented Christ, not in His passion, but crowned, as conquering Lord, in glory. Among the expressions of delight, the proudest was, " It is a present to the Pope from the English convert, the Marquis of Bute." The Pope did not, on this occasion, as he usuaUy does, pass up the whole of the nave on his portative throne — a process which guide-books describe as representing the Lord of Glory entering Paradise. He now alighted at the entrance of the basilica, and, with deliberate step and thrice radiant smUes, his head alone mitred whUe aU others were uncovered in pre sence of the " holiest," he marched among soldiers, priests, and subjects, a sovereign in excelsis. Before him went his hundreds of lieutenants, in attire which would have dazzled 19 290 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE ancient Pontifex, Flamen, and Augur. Every one of them was prepared to contend with princes in his cause, to set his name before that of their king, and to claim, in their respective countries, a supreme sway for his sceptre. Not a few of them had endured prosecution or prison to uphold his law against that of their country, and no note of the lyres that sounded the praises of the day was sweeter than that which commemorated the name of any martyr-bishop, hero of the kingdom of God, against the naturalism of the age. ¦ The Cardinals had not foUowed the bishops into the haU. They now stood near the high altar. Two bishops were at the faldstool, with book and candle. At the altar itself stood the officiating Cardinal, with a priest, a deacon and subdeacon, a master of the ceremonies, five acolytes bearing candles, and three clerks of the chapel. On arriving at the altar the Pontiff bowed upon the faldstool. Then the last strophe of the Veni Creator was exquisitely sung by the choir. To use the words of a priest, written, not for Spaniards or BrazUians, but for Germans : " Every member of the historical procession cast himself upon his knees before our God and Saviour in the form of bread, before whom all kings bow." 1 After the adoration of the Host the Pope, stUl kneeling, recited aloud the prayer, " Look upon us, O God our pro tector ! " — Protector Noster Aspice Deus — and for some time he continued reciting prayers in alternation with the choir. " Rising up," says Monsignor Guerin, " he recited a prayer to the Holy Sacrament, another to the Holy Spirit, a third to invoke the aid of the Holy Virgin and that of the Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul, a fourth to God " (Guerin, p. 76). The Cardinals, with their train-bearers, now turning to the right, entered the HaU of the Council, where the bishops had been waiting for some time. As the Pope advanced to the eventful enclosure, two former comrades in one lawyer's office held the corners of his pluvial —the Cardinals AntoneUi and Mertel. If these ministers 1 Stimmen, Neue Folge, vi. p. 116. A LOCALIZED DIVINITY 291 deserved half of the UI that was said of them by the common voice of Rome, or even by a writer like Liverani, who shuns private scandal, and only treats of public acts, Pius IX was not at that moment to be congratulated on the character of his companions. Confiding in the patronage of her whom he had set on high, he once more passed among the ornate hun dreds of his mighty but docile servants. Approaching the altar he offered up a prayer ; then passing to the throne at the far end of the HaU, he, in the words of Sambin, " dominated the whole assembly, and appeared like the teaching Christ " (P- 55)- The German Jesuit who wrote for the Stimmen said, " The bloodless offering was being presented on the altar, and soon must the invisible Head of the Church be present in form of bread. Opposite sits His representative upon a throne ; below him, the Cardinals ; around, the Catholic world, represented in its bishops " (Neue Folge, vi. p. 162). This localized presence, not yet actual, but to come at the word of the priest, was the same as that " divine presence " which Cardinal Manning, when leaving home, said many in the English Church were sighing for as having formerly been in their churches. The early Christians saw the most sublime token of God's presence in that absence of any simUitude which perplexed the heathen soldiery at Nicomedia, which, in India, first perplexes and then awes the Hindu, and which to spiritual worshippers says, in the deep tone of sUence — Lo, God is here, let us adore ! At this point, rather more than twenty of the particulars set down in the program had been got through, but there were one hundred and forty-eight of them in aU. It would be well worth whUe for any merely philosophic politician to foUow them one by one, marking the directions by which every act, posture, and prayer, whether audible or sUent, was prescribed. The science of government by spectacle reaUy deserves study by men of sense, because the practice of it is so mighty with all who take an impression for a reason. The 292 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE program is in the Acta, and those who choose to read it wiU find a prescription for each minutest move. The Archbishop of Iconium, whose real office was that of Vicar of St. Peter's, approached the throne, holding his mitre in his hands ; he made a profound obeisance, then drawing near, he kissed the Pope's knee. After this, mounting the pulpit, he preached, in cope and mitre, a sermon unlike that of Father Bianchi. It was long and tame, and hardly had the true Infallibilist ring. He felt that they were entering upon an untried and thorny path. " Tribulation," he said, " wUl arise, bitter days and innumerable sorrows " (Acta, pp. 204- 214). After the sermon the Pope rose and gave the benedic tion, during which the cardinals and bishops stood, the abbots and generals of orders kneeling down. " It is," says Monsignor Guerin, " the Moses of the new law, with his shining brow." He then offered up a prayer, with invocation of the Church triumphant and of all saints, " the formidable army which is drawn up around the Pope and the Council, and which assures victory to the Church," as Guerin expounds it. The preacher then published the indulgences from the pulpit. Now came an interlude preparatory to a transaction of grave importance. To prescribe the action of the interlude, it required aU the articles of the program from thirty-seven to fifty. To perform that action took up in a Christian place of worship probably a full half-hour of the time of seven hundred bishops, of several thousand clergymen, of Knights of Malta, of noble guards, Palatine guards, Swiss guards, of some two thousand soldiers, and of probably twenty thousand people. Two bishops, with book and candle, draw near to the throne. The Pontiff recites Quam dilecta, etc. The sub-deacon apostolic, who is a judge of the high court of the Rota, called the Supreme Tribunal of the whole Christian world, advances. He is accompanied by two judges of the high court of the Signet, to which even the Rota, in spite of its title, is subordinate.1 The three judges solemnly bear to the throne in a scarf of sUver cloth the apos tolic stockings and slippers trimmed with gold lace. The Frond, iii, p. 10. AN INTERLUDE OF TOILET 293 Pontiff puts on stockings and slippers. Monsignor the Sac ristan takes his place at the altar ready to give out the robes. The two judges of the high court of the Signet stand at the altar ready to take the robes from Monsignor the Sacristan, and to hand them to the cardinal deacon. Then the cardinal deacon approaches the throne. The senior cardinal priest ascends the steps of the throne and takes the ring from off the Pontiff. The judges of the high court of the Signet bring the robes to the throne. Then the senior cardinal priest, assisted by the cardinal deacons, takes off from the Pontiff the mitre, takes off the formal, the pluvial, the stole and the girdle ; after which he puts on the cord, the pectoral cross, the fanon, the stole, the tunic, the dalmatic, the gloves, and the white chasuble wrought with gold. The sub-deacon apostolic now bears the paUium to the throne, and one of the judges of the high court of the Signet accompanies him, bearing the pins. The car dinal deacon then puts upon the Pontiff the sacred pallium, takes the mitre and replaces it on the Pontiff. FinaUy, the senior cardinal priest again ascends the steps of the throne and puts on the ring which he had before taken off. And seven hundred bishops, and several thousand priests, and a couple of thousand soldiers, and some twenty thousand people, aU were agreed that this was imposing, impressive, divine. This public toUet was in preparation for what Cecconi caUs " the sublime and moving rite called the Obedience " ; the homage of the vassals to the ruler of the world. First the Cardinals one by one arose, slowly approached the throne, performed an obeisance, and kissed the hand of the sovereign. Then patriarchs, archbishops, and bishops, approaching in their turn, made low reverences before the steps of the throne, and, slowly drawing nigh, kissed the Pope's right knee. Abbots and generals of orders knelt before reaching the steps of the throne, rose, drew nigh, knelt again, and kissed the king's right foot. For an hour and a quarter this act of homage was continued. From the banks of the Thames and of the Seine, of the Ganges and the Hudson ; from the Alps and the Andes ; from historic lands of Asia, whence the light of history 294 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE had long faded ; from emerging countries in the New World, on which its first beams were beginning to strike — came for ward lordly figures of men accustomed to command, and sometimes to domineer. Each, with chosen and awe-struck movement, drew near to the king of his heart and conscience, and rendered up his homage, like gold and frankincense and myrrh. Vitelleschi, in a vein generally Roman, aUuding to these " five quarters of an hour " spent in bowing, kneeling, and kissing, says, " What strength of memory is necessary for him who being humbly entitled the Servant of the Servants of God, had to keep that modest formula in mind during the whole cere mony ! " But if the scene at this particular point might tax the memory of the Pope, it would surely cheer the hopes of those " august minds " that, having adapted their code to the views of confessors, were now idle spectators of the CouncU, while other kings were on their thrones. The ex-sovereigns of Naples, Tuscany, and Parma, looking on that display of widely-extended power, and viewing through the stained win dows of a Catholic imagination the political forces represented by it, might be both excused and commiserated if they saw signs of happy days returning. The Jesuits said, " Surely those non-Catholics who witnessed this action must have perceived that Catholicity, like unity, is found only where Christ lives, speaks, and reigns — in Peter ; that is, in the Roman Church, of which Pius IX is now Peter." But we may quietly ask, Could even those writers fancy Peter, at the only Apostolic Council, seated upon a throne somewhere on Mount Zion, whUe John, James, and Paul came up in the presence of the assembled Church and kissed his knee, and Philip, Barnabas, and others knelt and kissed his foot ? Far as the aesthetics of those Jesuits had descended, by a long materializing process, they must surely have read enough of the Holy Scriptures to feel that the scene enacted in St. Peter's, though a fine edition of a Durbar, was a sad faU from an Apostolic Council. You promise the pupils of Plato a higher wisdom than they ever knew in the Academy, and they find THE PAPAL ALLOCUTION 295 for wisdom the gewgaws of Freemasons. Such a scene was bad in manners, bad in politics, and bad in religion. In manners, it tended to make men servUe in a lower position and arrogant in a higher ; in politics, it tended to make them either slaves or despots ; in religion, it tended to make them either unbelieving or superstitious. Is it part of the penalty of Rome that barbaric forms should linger at its Court, when the spirit of Christianity has banished them from the Courts of Christian kings ? Our own monarch, at the head of her two hundred and eighty millions, is too good a Christian to make her subject Rajahs, as a spectacle for her commons and her troops, come and fall down and kiss her foot. The words which commanded the foUowers of Christ not to exercise over one another the kind of lordship which the kings of the GentUes exercised over them were, with pompous action, publicly trampled upon in this scene of " the obedience," and that both in the spirit and in the letter. He who complacently sat and acted out that scene in the house of God for an hour and a quarter, might better claim to represent many known in the history of ambition, than the lowly Lord of Peter. Up to this time only sixty-seven articles of the program had been performed. Thirty more were exhausted by pos tures, manipulations, and devotions. The officiating cardinal- priest then came forward, bearing the reeking censer. He waved it before the enthroned priest, around whom sweUed up the clouds tUl subject eyes looked up to him through a sacred haze, and tiU he looked down on his subject creatures from a sky of fragrant mist. This ceremony fulfilled, all took their seats with their mitres on, and the Pontiff, rising, de-. livered his allocution. It overflowed with joy and? hope. It clearly pointed out the enemy to be destroyed: "A con spiracy of the wicked, mighty by combination, rich in re sources, fortified with institutions, and using hberty for a cloak of maliciousness." Obviously this enemy was not a theological but a political one. ViteUeschi, who naturally heard with Italian ears, says that the language, though using a cloak, was. plain enough, tp show what enemy was, meant.. 296 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE As the Pontiff drew to the close of his aUocution, he, with a burst of feeling, put up two invocations, one to the Holy Spirit, the other to the Blessed Virgin. After this, with contagious intensity of emotion, he threw up both hands to heaven. At a bound, the whole assembly stood up. Then he poured forth the final invocation with the fuUest resonance of his wonderful tones — tones which might have served in chanting from Gerizim to Ebal. He invoked angels and arch angels, Peter, Paul, and all the saints, more particularly those whose ashes were venerated on that spot. This speech from the apostolic throne, exclaims Monsignor Guerin, beginning with the liveliest joy, afterwards expressing divine agonies, concluded with firm and tranquil confidence ! Now foUowed another round of ceremonies, at the close of which the master of the ceremonies proclaimed, " Let those who are not members of the Council withdraw." The royal and noble spectators left the scene ; the doors were closed. The Knights of Malta and the noble guard stood sentry be tween the faithful, who were to receive the creed as it might be shaped, and the Fathers, who were to decide for them what their creed should be. What would take place before those doors should be opened again ? Persistent rumour had said that the extreme party meant to attempt an acclamation. Therefore many belived it possible that in one brief sitting the basis of infaUibUity might be shifted from that of an in fallible Church to that of an infaUible man. Other rumours asserted that some French prelates had let it be known that if any attempt at getting up an acclamation should be made, they would leave the Council. But what might take place behind those charmed walls, who could teU ? AU that could be said with certainty was that now, for the first time in the history of man, one hundred and seventy millions, perhaps two hundred millions, were standing idle spectators of the process of altering their creed. They had not a single representative ; not one channel of expression, not one possible resort in appeal. What used to be a general council was now a conclave ; sitting behind a guard of armed THE DECREE 297 men. King and priest, counciUor of state and doctor of divinity, were equally shut out. The Catholic multitude appeared indifferent. The few who were not indifferent were powerless. They had all been parties to narrowing the idea of the Church to that of the clergy. That idea was now, with out the consent of any one being asked, formaUy narrowed from that of the clergy to that of the bishops and Court pre lates. It might further be narrowed from that of the Episco pate to that of the Pope. It appears to us not very easy to call men fanatics who have done so much with mankind, when they propose and expect to do stiU more ! The point at which we now stand in the program of the day is the 109th Article, which is the first of several prescribing a ceremony with a substance. Bishop Fessler, Secretary of the Council, and Bishop Valenziani of Fabriano, approached the throne. The Secretary handed a document to the Pontiff. The Pope handed the document to Valenziani, who thereupon, ascending the pulpit, turned towards the throne, made a pro found obeisance, took off his mitre, and read out as follows — " Pius, the Bishop-Servant of the Servants of God, with the approbation of the Holy Council." Having now pronounced the title of the decree, he again put on his mitre, seated him self, and proceeded to read the substance of the Decree. This consisted of one sentence, declaring the Council opened. In that Ul-constructed haU few heard what was read ; and many were wicked enough to hint that, if ill-constructed, the hall was not Ul-contrived. Once more laying aside the mitre, Bishop Valenziani rose and asked, " Is the Decree now read agreed to ? " The bishops were seated in their mitres, the abbots standing bareheaded. There was no formal vote. Those who understood what was said, cried Placet, and others repeated the cry. No one dissented. This result was com municated to the sovereign, and he from the throne pro- :laimed — " The Decree now read is agreed to by the Fathers, none dissenting ; and we decree, enact, and sanction it, as read." These forms were exactly repeated, and a second Decree was passed. Like the first, it consisted of a single sentence, which 298 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE fixed the next public session for January 6. The two Pro moters of the Council, as they were caUed, now advancing, first knelt on the lowest step of the throne, and then addressed the notaries, saying, " We pray you, Protonotaries here present, to draw up an authentic document, recording aU and singular the acts done in this public session of the aU-holy Oecumenical Vatican CouncU." The senior protonotary then appealing to the Majordomo and the High Chamberlain, who stood on the right hand of the throne, said, " We shall draw it up, ye being witnesses " (Frond, vii. p. 119). The constitutional crisis had come and gone, and very few were aware of it. Those who had thought of the program as anything more than the order of a pageant, must have observed that the signification of those acts amounted to no less than putting aside the concUiar form of Decree, and adopt ing in its stead that of the Papal Bulls. We have aheady seen that Friedrich, as a Church historian, saw this at a glance. It need not be said that the ancient Councils, representing the whole Church, spoke in their own name, themselves decreeing and enacting. As to the only CouncU " over " which Pontiff Peter I " presided," it would not do to cite it as an example.1 As late as Trent, every Decree bore upon the face of it the words, " This holy Council enacts and decrees." All the statutes of the Council of Trent, without alteration of a word, were immediately confirmed by the Pope, he having beforehand promised, in writing, to do so. The formula then used was, of course, liable to the interpretation that it indicated the superiority of the CouncU to the Pope. That interpretation had been actuaUy put upon it by schools in the Church, at one time, including whole nations. The Decrees now passed had never been before the Council for deliberation, but were handed from the throne ready made. The Pope, according to the formula, did not merely sanction, but decreed, enacted, and sanctioned — that is, he took the part of both parliament and crown. 1 In the list of Popes, the name Peter is repeated only in the case. of. one, and he was an anti-pope. CONSENT OF THE CARDINALS 299 The CouncU is only mentioned as " approving " of this ab sorption of its own powers into those of its head. The part thus aUowed to this so-called Oecumenical CouncU, this Senate of Humanity, in framing Decrees, is less than the part allowed to the CoUege of Cardinals in the framing of BuUs. Take, for instance, the Bull of Convocation. It expressly says that, in issuing it, the Pope acts not only with the consent of the Cardinals, but by their counsel. This expresses more than " with the approbation." All, therefore, that the coUective episcopate did for the College of Cardinals was somewhat to curtail its relative legislative im portance. Alone, both its counsel and consent were recognized. When united with all the bishops, only its consent. This looked like telling the bishops that their counsel was super fluous. In the Bull history conquered dogma. The counsel and consent of the Cardinals was the memento of the historical fact that the Bishop of Rome originally spoke with authority only when he spoke as the mouthpiece of the local clergy. In the Decree dogma conquered history. The Bishop of Rome alone was to appear as speaking with authority, and aU other bishops were to appear only as approving, but neither as counselling nor confirming ; as for the clergy, they were no longer of the Teaching Church. The substance of the Decrees passed was perfectly innocent. They had, moreover, the advantage of exactly copying the acts done in the first session at Trent, while destroying the forms there employed. In the Acta of that Council two resolutions, declaring the Council opened, and fixing the day for the second public session, were entered as constituent acts, before the heading given to Decrees of the constituted body began to be used. The two constituent resolutions were not even headed by the name of the Council,. while the name of the Pope does not occur in the heading of' any of the Decrees, much less does it stand, as the sole legist lative authority. At Trent it was not a private member of' the CouncU, like Bishop Valenziani, but the first presiding legate, Cardinal. De Monte,, wha read out the draft, of. a resolution, in the form- 300 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE of a question declaring the Council opened. To this question the Fathers " all with one consent answered, Placet" The second resolution was put in the same form. Both, as we have intimated, were entered without the heading of Decrees, and stand as the acts of a body organizing itself, but not as legisla tive acts of that body when organized. Every subsequent Decree is a real legislative act, and therefore bears the formal heading, " The All-Holy Council of Trent, in the Holy Ghost lawfully assembled . . . ordains and decrees." 1 The formula adopted in the Vatican CouncU had the ad vantage of determining, once for all, what that Council was to be, namely, a secret consistory of bishops, to give an approval to Papal Constitutions. Its Presidents were Cardinals, an office unknown to the Christian Church — princes simply of the Court of Rome, though most of them bear the orders of priest. Of the members of the Council a vast number, though called bishops, were really no more than mitred equerries and chamberlains. In the means it took to deprive the diocesan bishops of their inherited powers in Council, the Curia knew its men. Brought up in the sentiment that an effective " func tion " is the sublimest stroke of civil or ecclesiastical govern ment, it would have been a revolt against aU their instincts to disturb a pageant so unrivalled as the one in which they that day had the felicity of bearing a part. The Curia placed them in this dilemma : Either they must rise up amidst that blaze of splendour and resist the act of the sovereign at whose feet they had just bowed, or they must learn at a later stage, if they should then challenge the Rules of Procedure, that the moment for objection was past. The success of the Curia was complete. The general drew out his men for a review, and turned the Thermopylae of the opposition without having ever seen a Spartan. Those who had come up resolved to oppose changes in their creed soon found that the one pass that might 1 The form of the opening resolutions and of the Decrees is found in any edition of the Canons and Decrees of the Council ; the full account of the proceedings, taken down at the time by MassareUus, the Secretary of the Council, in Theiner's Acta Genuina, vol. i. 28, 29. NO ACCLAMATION 301 have been held against overwhelming odds was already in the enemy's rear. The Nine had not spent nearly ten months on the Rules of Procedure for nothing. When this brief episode in the drama of the day had passed over, the doors were^thrown open, and the spectators who had been excluded resumed cheir places. Many of the priests outside would feel disappointed that they had not heard the hall resound with the voices of an acclamation. That would have told that Papal infaUibUity was adopted without dis cussion. Friedrich lets it appear that he felt relieved at the opening of the doors before there had been any exulting sound, and doubtless many shared his feeling. Rumours, persistently kept up, declared that Archbishop Manning would propose the dogma, and that the majority, breaking out into acclamation, would bear down all oppo sition. If such a design was ever entertained, it had been thought — some say it had been found — that it would prove wiser not to proceed so hastily. The passing of two Decrees in the form of Papal Constitutions was enough to carry " the forms of the house," whUe the issuing of the Rules of Procedure as a Bull, before the Council was opened, had taken away every pretext for aUeging that they were open to revision by the CouncU itself, as being its own acts. Archbishop Manning, on his return to England, in a pas toral, treated the rumour of an intended acclamation as if it was only laughable. A reason which he assigns for this is that Rome had had enough of acclamations, seeing that many who acclaimed infaUibUity in 1867 had openly turned against it. The rumours, however, were too consistent, and too well supported by the hints of the Civiltd and by the plain words of Monsignor Plantier and others, to be prudently dismissed with a smUe— at least, anywhere but in England. They were not what Dr. Manning represents them, rumours of an acclamation without a definition, but of a definition carried by acclama tion, as in the case of the Immaculate Conception. On the other hand, Archbishop Manning's thrust at those who had in 1867 signed language that might seem to mean everything 302 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE included in infaUibUity, without themselves intending to express that doctrine, is natural in one who had not wholly unlearned the Protestant worth of words. Nevertheless, of all grounds on which the prefects of the Pope should begin to trip one another up, the ground to be selected by preference is scarcely that of finesse in the interpretations they put on what they say. As to the part assigned to Dr. Manning per sonaUy, it is possible that the rumour represented no more than the fact that both they who hoped for an acclamation, and they who feared it, mentioned the name which occurred to them as that of the most likely instrument of such a pro cedure, and both happened to pronounce the same name. As if to justify this instinctive selection of both parties, Dr. Manning, on his return home, said that if the Council " had defined the infaUibUity at its outset, it would not have been an hour too soon ; and perhaps it would have averted many a scandal we now deplore." 1 A Roman noble thus notes the zeal of Dr. Manning — No one is so devoted as a convert. Having himself erred for half his lifetime did not restrain him from becoming the most ardent champion of infalhbihty. This circumstance raised a presumption of a deficiency, on his part, in that traditional ecclesiastical spirit which is never fuUy acquired but by being early grounded and by long continued usage — a presumption which was justified by his excessive and intemperate restlessness. This seemed a cause sufficient to lessen his authority with the Conservative portion of the ecclesiastical world, which judges with more calmness and serenity.2 — (Vitelleschi, p. 35.) The real work of the day was now done. It was time to sing the Te Deum. The Pontiff sounded the first note, and was followed by the Fathers of the CouncU, by the choir, by the thousands outside in the Basilica. The strain was caught up in nave and aisles, in every chapel and every gallery ; it mounted aloft into vaults and dome, tiU aU who were be neath the gorgeous roof thriUed under that returning sweU 1 Priv. Petri, Part III. p. 36. 2 This version, made before the publication oi the English translation, differs from it only in immaterial points. (See Eight Months, p, 22.) AN UNEQUALLED PAGEANT 303 of exulting sound ; and many felt as if the world was falling, overwhelmed with harmony, at the feet of Pio Nono. The eighteen articles of the program stiU remaining con tained little beyond unrobing, re-robing, and dissolving. The people had been for seven hours in the Cathedral. It stiU rained in torrents. The clerical organs said the provi dential rain had prevented mobs in different places from making hostile demonstrations. During the time spent in the Cathedral, the people had not heard — except so far as some of them could make out the Latin — a sentence of the Word of God or of the words of man. The seven hours of the twenty thousand had been spent in an intermitting gaze. AU went away, not only praising the pageant of the day, but extolling it. Friedrich quotes a diplomatist who said it was " superb." The correspondent of the Times said : "It has been my fortune to see many pageants in Rome, but none of them equaUed, in majestic solemnity, the scene presented by the procession of bishops from all countries in the world." 1 Monsignor Guerin cried : "It offered the most majestic and enchanting spectacle which it was ever given to mortals to behold here below." M. Veuillot said that bishops were there from the rising to the setting of the sun — men who would invade regions as yet closed against them — the light-bearers and the God-bearers.2 These old men, he added, would over throw darkness and death, and the day would break (vol. i. p. 12). ViteUeschi remarked that there was indeed a bishop from Chaldea and one from Chicago, but the former did not represent a Catholic Chaldea, nor the latter a Catholic Chicago. Even, he added, in countries caUed Catholic, what proportion of the population are reaUy of their flocks ? He might have further added, And if theh teaching is true, what proportion of their flocks are reaUy Catholics ? — for they teach that a doubt on any single article of faith propounded by their Church, or a doubt on one of her interpretations of a text of Scripture, taints one with heresy. How many Italians 1 Times, Dec. 14, 1869. 2 " Les porles-lumi&res et les porles-Dieu," 304 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE were, on the day of the opening of the Council, free from that taint ? We are reminded of an Englishman whose name, when he was only thirty years of age, gained for him distinguished attention at the Vatican. His Protestantism was much in fluenced by his early study of the corruptions of Christianity at the centre of them. Had John Milton witnessed that pageant we know exactly what he would have said. First he would have shown that when the filial spirit of Christianity had been lost, the servUe spirit of Paganism supervened. When men ceased to come to God as chUdren to a father, they sought circuitous access through upper servants. Then foUowed what he describes in a sentence with a strong flavour of the Phsedrus — They began to draw down aU the divine intercourse betwixt God and the soul, yea, the very shape of God Himself, into an exterior and bodily form, urgently pretending a necessity and oblige- ment of joining the body in a formal reverence, and worship circum scribed ; they hallowed it, they fumed it, they sprinkled it, they bedecked it, not in robes of pure innocency, but of pure linen, with other deformed and fantastic dresses, in paUs and mitres, gold and gewgaws fetched from Aaron's old wardrobe, or the flamin's vestry : then was the priest set to con his motions and his postures, his liturgies and his lurries, tiU the soul, by this means of over- bodying herself, given up justly to fleshly delights, bated her wing apace downward : and finding the ease she had from her visible and sensuous colleague the body, in performance of religious duties, her pinions now broken and flagging, shifted off from herself the labour of high soaring any more, forgot her heavenly flight, and left the dull and droiling carcase to plod on in the old road, and drudging trade of outward conformity. . . . They knew not how to hide their slavish approach to God's behests, by them not understood, nor worthily received, but by cloaking theh servile crouching to all religious presentments, sometimes lawful, sometimes idolatrous, under the name of humility, and terming the piebald frippery and ostentation of ceremonies, decency. — Of Reformation in England, first book. A writer in the Stimmen thought that if those who were separated from the Church h?d only been present they might FEARS tOFjATTACK 305 have been won back. It would be an easy way to settle the merits of a rehgion, if it could be done by the simple ex periment of what body had the grandest buUding for a dis play, or the greatest number of richly dressed men to perform. We do not presume to say whether Peter ever did visit Rome or not ; but, supposing that he did, the question between him and the sovereign Pontiff of the day, as to the value of their respective religions, would soon have been settled in favour of Nero, if it had gone by buUdings, statues, robes, and retinues. Probably the poor itinerant preacher was so conscious that, as MUton would say, his religion " to the gorgeous solemnities of paganism, and the sense of the world's children, seemed but a homely and yeomanly religion," that he would not have challenged comparison with the purpled Pontiff on that ground. Any writer who could imagine that the tendency of a " function " performed in the manner of the one we have described is to convince Protestants that the Church of Rome has in her forms much likeness left to the Church of Christ, must be unaware of the first elements of a comparison. When we search the Scriptures daUy to see whether these things are so, the estrangement of the Papacy from the Christianity of Christ, and its affinity to the Romanism of the Pagan Pontiffs, become more and more impressive. The feeling in St. Peter's did not permit guards to be dis pensed with. It transpired that extreme precaution had been taken to prevent the BasUica from being blown up. At the time, the general impression appeared to be that some of the National party had played upon the fears of the priests, hoax ing them with hints of such a design. But after what occurred in Paris during the reign of the Commune, one can hardly think it impossible that some of the violent and ignorant may have entertained wUd plans. In 1867, a startling example of what might be done had been shown in the blowing up of a barrack of the zouaves. When populations which have long been governed by spectacle, set out for a political sensation, they sometimes go dreadful lengths to find a stirring one. The city was to have been grandly iUuminated, but the 20 306 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE drenching rain would have mocked all effort to keep in the tender life of the lamps. Let us hope, said the clerical writers, that the blue sky of Rome wUl smile on the close of the Council, and that then the eternal city wUl glow brighter even than Ephesus in 431 (Stimmen, N. F., p. 166). In addition to human helps to faith, it was announced that divine helps had been vouchsafed. On this ever-memorable day the bones of the martyrs at Concordia had distiUed water, which in that part of Venetia was a recognized presage of a joyful future. This is announced in the organ of that Court which was soberly undertaking to inaugurate a new era for all the societies of men (Civiltd, VII. ix. 104). The same periodical in the very next sentence gave samples of fanatical English Protestants. Citing the Pall Mall Gazette, it told how a series of meetings had been held in Freemasons' Hall, at the suggestion of Dr. Merle d'Aubigne, to pray for the Council. It went on to say that the Chairman, Mr. Arthur Kinnaird, had told how similar meetings for prayer were to be held aU over the world, and even among the Protestants of Italy. It quoted two of the petitions said to have been offered up. Canon Auriol prayed that all the machinations of Rome might be turned to confusion, and Dr. Cumming that the day of her imagined triumph might prove to be that of her pro phesied ruin. It was much pleasanter work to teU of the Anti-Council of the Freethinkers at Naples. Praying Protestants are to be hated and extinguished. But vaunting infidels are to the Jesuits what fires are to insurance offices — their apparent foes, but their only real supports. That assembly spent a couple of days in vague and sometimes vast talk. It abused the Pope, and the Jesuits say it blasphemed God. It proposed to find a code of morals without religion, those flowers without any stems which are the holy grail of such knights errant. FinaUy, it attacked the French Emperor and the Italian monarchy, and was dissolved by the police. Demonstrations of a somewhat simUar kind were attempted in a few other cities of Italy. In France, on the contrary, the foUowing cities MEETING AT VIENNA 307 were illuminated, and were lauded not only in their local clerical journals, but in the great Civiltd : Lyons, Bordeaux, MarseUles, Toulouse, Limoges, Clermont, Saint-Etienne, Laval, Moulins, Nismes, Auch, " and others." Even in Paris many convents iUuminated their facades. (Guerin, p. 78.) At Vienna a meeting of the nobility, gentry, clergy, and officials composing the Catholic Societies, and numbering, it is said, four thousand, was held to celebrate the day. The only Italian city specified as having made any favourable demonstration was Brescia ; and the account ' amounted to no more than that of an attendance of some Society of young men at Mass, and of the sending of a promise of adhesion to the CouncU. CHAPTER II First Proceedings — Unimportant Committees and All-Important Commissions — No Council if Pope dies — Theologians discover their Disfranchisement— Father Ambrose — Parties and Party Tactics — Were the Bishops Free Legislators ? — Plans of Recon struction—Plan of the German Bishops— Segesser's Plan— New Bull of Excommunications THE day foUowing the wonderful Wednesday, of which the proceedings filled up the last chapter, was not too much for rest, and probably, indeed, was too little for the bishops to tell how effective the function had been. On the Friday, however, they had again to meet for the first General Congregation, or deliberative sitting. This was presided over by the Cardinals appointed, whereas the Pope in person presided over the Public Sessions, or solemnities, for formally promulging Decrees. Cardinal De Reisach, Chief President, was not in his chair, but upon his death-bed. As we have seen, he had superintended the drawing up (it is believed that with his own hand he had drawn up) the first code of laws to regulate the relations of the Church to civil society ; but his code has never met the public eye. From this first General Congregation, writes Friedrich, even the theologians were shut out. The occupation of the day for nearly eight hundred bishops was to elect two committees of five each : one to examine applications for leave of absence ; and the other to settle contests as to precedence, and simUar matters, which contests at Trent often proved to be serious, indeed ere now the streets of Rome have witnessed bloodshed arising out of disputes of this sort between bishops. The members of these com mittees were called respectively Judges of Excuses and Judges of Complaints and Disputes. The mode of election was COMMISSION OF PROPOSALS 309 simple ; every one wrote five names on a card. It proved that Fallibilists must not expect the smallest share of office. Cardinal De Luca took the chief place, and opened the Con gregation with a few simple sentences. These were trans lated by interpreters for the Orientals who did not under stand Latin. The prelate who on this occasion celebrated Mass at the opening of the sitting was the Bishop of Osimo, afterwards Cardinal Vitelleschi, to whom some have ascribed the authorship of the work of his brother, which we often quote.1 The real business of the day, too important to be left to the episcopate, had been done without them. It consisted in appointing the Commission of Proposals. Twelve Car dinals, twelve archbishops, and two bishops were announced as the men whom the Pontiff had put in charge of the rights of their brethren. Prelates with titles from Antioch, Jeru salem, Thessalonica, and Sardis ; one from ChUi and one from Baltimore ; one from Spain, one from Westminster, two Italians, and a few others, were empowered to say whether the men who ruled the sees of Paris, Lyons, Munich, Cologne, and Milan, and those of Hungary and Portugal, were or were not to be recommended to the Pope for permission to bring forward any proposal. The Commission could not grant them leave to do so, but it could report to the Pontiff, who alone could determine. As some seven hundred and fifty bishops found all their hopes of proposing anything placed at the discretion of these twenty-six men, it was not for them to reason why : it was for them simply to read in the names now announced the record of past services and the fate of future suggestions.* They had not stayed the proceedings when they found that the Prosynodal Congregation had been used to fasten upon them an edict which took away their right of self-organization, and it was now hopeless to attempt to recover that right. The three youngest archbishops on the list were GianneUi, Manning, and Deschamps ; the secretary of the Nine, and 1 Acta Sanctae Sedis, vol. v. p. 279. 2 Ibid. p. 18. 310 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE ' the two hottest InfallibUists — all three on the way to the purple, which they have since received at one and the same time. But the sensation of the day, perhaps brought about at this moment to divert attention from the painful inroad just made upon episcopal rights, was a BuU determining the course to be taken should the death of the Pontiff occur during the Council. This edict determined that the bishops must not, in that case, elect a successor or transact any business, but that the CouncU must be held as suspended tiU another Pope should be duly .elected by the Cardinals alone, and tUl it should be again caUed together by him. Pius IX ordained that this law should endure for ever, as the rule in aU similar cases. This measure made the CouncU an appendage to the person of the Pope, not capable of sustaining its existence without him, and consequently having no imaginable power over him. It also made it inferior to the College of Cardinals — an abnormal body, composed of " creatures " of the crown, without any pretence to a constitutional place in the Christian Church — " Princes," and some of them, like AntoneUi, not even priests. " Pivots," as their name imports, true " pivots "l of the Court, which has turned a religion into a school of costume, policy, and arms, they have, we repeat, as Cardinals, neither name nor place, neither order nor office, in the known constitution of the Catholic Church. When men who held that bishops were successors of the Apostles allowed the right of aU the bishops in the world to choose their own head to be confiscated by an edict in favour of these Court officers, they were not likely afterwards to be strong supports of any true authority, only of that arbitrary wiU which finds ah the sanction of its acts in itself. The Cardinals may weU de nounce nationalism, since to uphold their pretensions the mitres of all nations must bow to the hat of a prince in the suite of one little king. It would be unreasonable to think less of a man for wearing a scarlet hat and scarlet stockings, 1 The popular explanation " hinge " is quite correct ; the ancient hinge was a pivot inserted in a mortise, on which the door turned. EXCLUSION OF THEOLOGIANS 311 if his position in life caUs him to it ; almost as unreasonable as to think more of him for it. But to put a prince into that grotesque Court dress, and then turn him, by virtue of his Court position, into a titular bishop, or archbishop, and to expect his irregular office to be recommended by his incon gruous attire, is a proof of the unlimited faith of the Curia in costume. The experience of the day taught two lessons. First, the hall proved to be utterly unfit for deliberation, as every archi tect or public speaker must have known that it would prove, though about twenty-four thousand pounds had been spent in adapting a space within the Cathedral. But the second lesson of the day's experience was of a different kind. It had become plain that FallibUists and InfallibUists were to be parted off from one another by a hard official line, and that no distinction would be made between FaUibilists and Inopportunists. The Curia, instead of showing any fear of the minority, was evidently resolved on letting it be known that Rome was not the place to form an opposition. The Rules had in fact aheady disposed of the minority. We have intimated that possibly theologians came up to the CouncU with no more knowledge of what awaited them than the bishops. This was at least the case with Friedrich. On the Monday after the opening ceremony, accompanied by Kagarer, theologian to his Grace of Munich, he waited on the Secretary of the Council. I knew, says the Professor, that at Trent every theologian was not entitled only, but bound, to take part in the labours of the Council, by pre paring papers and publicly discussing questions. But, he adds, " we were undeceived with a witness." The Secretary told them that the duty of theologians in connexion with the CouncU was " nothing." They were only to give informa tion or advice to their respective bishops, as it might be asked for. The decision thus announced to the doctors had been taken eleven months previously. The Nine, at their meetings of January 24 and 315 (Cecconi, p. 205) had determined that 312 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE there should be no congregation of inferior theologians, as the doctors were called, in opposition to the bishops, the superior theologians. The open discussions which had given light to the people on the one side and to the prelates on the other were thus quenched. The people were no more to have any means of ascertaining what was being done with their creed, nor even, when something had been done, were they to have means of ascertaining what were the processes by which the new dogmas had been established. AU that they were now to learn was to be the fait accompli, hence forth to become the standard of faith for all and in aU. The order of priests was to be shorn of its last vestige of repre sentation in the Councils of the Church. The bishops, on the other hand, were not to be allowed to know what could be said for or against a proposed dogma, before they were caUed upon to close it up for ever. This one turn of the screw wrung even from Cecconi a mUd but distinct expression of doubt. He feels (p. 205) that " the Fathers generaUy lost a mighty assistance in the discharge of their high office." He ventures to quote Pallavicino, the Jesuit historian of Trent, whose language shows that the old Jesuits had broad views com pared with those now ruling. PaUavicino's words remind us of the cry of poor Monsignor Liverani : " We might be aUowed to be Liberals up to the mark of BeUarmine " — Many of the bishops were learned in the science of theology, but the most eminent, as is the case in all sciences, were the private theologians, since they had not been diverted by pubhc cares from regular study, without which eminent prudence is often acquired, but not eminent erudition. But Pius IX had no intention of allowing bishops to satisfy their consciences by hearing all that could be said on both sides before they gave a judgment. It would be hard to find a neater specimen of the terms in which the abolition of a venerable franchise may be couched than in the words of Cecconi. He lets us know that on the 4th of July, 1869, the Nine resolved to " confer on the theo- FATHER AMBROSE 313 logians of bishops the right of being eligible to be caUed to serve the committees of the Council." It would be only in keeping with a system of quotation regularly practised if this statement of Cecconi should be, hereafter, used to prove that the theologians at the Vatican Council did not suffer any curtailment of their rights, but received an increase of them. But exclusion from the right of pleading before " my lords " was not all the degradation awaiting the unfortunate doctors. Bishop Fessler told them that they were free to give information or advice each to his own bishop, but, adds Friedrich, only to him. We wonder what man was not free to give private advice if asked for it. They were not to be aUowed to attend meetings of the bishops ; not even to meet among themselves to consult in common upon questions affecting the Council.1 Friedrich was not the most to be pitied of the theologians. Father Ambrose, a Carmelite, had been brought up from Germany by his general, a Spaniard. At the first interview the general told him that the aU-important question was that of Papal infaUibUity. Father Ambrose declared himself a FaUibUist, and produced a work which he had pre pared on the subject. He at once lost his post ; and the general wished to send him off to Malta. Cardinal Hohenlohe pleaded for his restoration, but in vain. The general feared that the order would be utterly put to shame if in addition to the scandal of the Cracow nun, and that of Father Hyacinthe's defection, a theologian of the Order brought up to the Council should be known as a FaUibUist. The poor man had even to go to Cardinal Hohenlohe, and to beg of him to give him back a copy of his little work which he had presented to his Eminence. This the Cardinal refused to do, saying that even if the general had ordered it, he had nothing to say to a Cardinal. Ambrose was permitted to return to Wurzburg, and before he started a prelate said to him, " I should rejoice if any one recaUed me or sent me home. We bishops have been ordered here to the Council without being told what we were to deliberate upon, and 1 Compare Quirinus, 86, and Tagebuch, 25. 314 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE now that I know it, I could gladly turn my back upon the CouncU and Rome." Another minute touch of Friedrich at this moment shows how he heard a devoted Roman adherent of the Papacy say that an officer had sent him twenty scudi (about four pounds) as an offering to Peter's Pence ; but he had returned the money, telling his friend he would do better to spend it on his famUy. "His conscience had dictated this course," for he knew how Peter's Pence were spent. The correspondent of the Stimmen must have been under the triumphal influence of the opening, when he informed his German readers that wonderful unanimity reigned, and that what might be called the Opposition was daUy shrinking up into nothing, and would soon reward only microscopical research.1 The Unitd Cattolica of January i aUeged that the Francais, in using the expression, " A fraction of mal contents," might possibly be right, if it meant an almost impalpable fraction ; but if it meant anything more, it was false. The alleged discontent, it went on to say, was spoken of as if it related to the Commission of Proposals appointed by the Pope. Some were said to wish that the CouncU itself should have had the selection of a committee. It was false ; no one complained. It could not be disputed that the Pontiff, having the right to convoke, rule, and guide the CouncU, had also the right to determine what questions should be submitted to it. Pius IX had, indeed, himself confirmed this in the BuU by which he settled the Rules of Procedure. This is not conscious but unconscious irony. It reflects the course of the Papacy, displaying its administrative force and its logical infirmity in one word. A right is first deshed, then secretly assumed, next insinuated in indirect forms, and finally embodied in an act assuming it as already ascer tained ; after which, this very act is taken as proof that it was previously established. When the Nine met, they con fessed that it was questionable if the right existed to lay down rules for a General CouncU of the Catholic Church by a sub- 1 Stimmen, N. F., vi. p. 170, TWO CAMPS 315 committee of the Cardinals. But they assumed the right as unchallenged, embodied the assumption in an edict, and now turned to that edict as proof of the pre-existing right. A few days later, the correspondent of the Stimmen again said that, while the intelligence furnished to the ordinary journals was absurd, one thing might be relied upon, namely, that what was caUed an Opposition was daUy diminishing.1 Another Jesuit, writing after the CouncU, did not confirm these. statements of the inspired organs, but foUowed the pro fane journals, whose inteUigence was at the time decried — Behold, says Sambin, two camps face to face ! On one side, Rome and her Sovereign Pontiff, surrounded by a vast majority of the bishops, displaying the banner of the Church as set up by her divine Redeemer. On the other side, an uncertain number of men belonging to all ranks of the hierarchy, seduced by Ulusory appearances or frightened by the danger of attacking modern ideas in front — men who fancy that the Church ought to parley with the notions of the age. a The orthodox view on this point was expressed by the Civiltd in its first number after the Council was opened. " The Press and public meetings are the two mainsprings by which the spirit of the age, or Masonry, or, to give things their proper names, Satan, moves public opinion for his own ends." 3 At that moment Satan was busy not only with the Italian and German Press, but with the Standard, Saturday Review, and other English papers. Another aspect of the Council was exhibited, not in the secular newspapers, but in the clerical periodicals. Eight days after the opening session, the Stimmen was informed how, on an afternoon as mUd as summer, the grounds of the ViUa Borghese were enlivened by a review in honour of the Fathers of the Council. The troops were much com mended, not omitting the Squadriglieri, whom the Italians profanely charged with having been recruited from the brigands but whom the Jesuits described as excellent Catholics. The Civiltd was reaUy edified byjLthis display. In the mUitary 1 Id., p. 172. 2 Sambin, p. 41. 3 VII. ix. 6. 3i 6 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE review, it says — and we repeat word for word — the profane spectacle was dominated by the thought of the new crusaders defiling before so many bishops, spectators and a spectacle no longer witnessed at a mUitary review. It was weU and truly said that this review looked like a function in St. Peters'.1 A few days later, the faithful, whose supply of news never related to either doctrine or discipline, were edified by an account of a performance in a military casino, in honour of the Austrian and Swiss bishops. It is inferred that the Pope's foreign troops must be highly educated, because the beautiful scenery had been entirely painted by the soldiers. The curtain represented St. Michael the Archangel overcoming the first great rebel. The first great rebel, by some wonderful prolepsis, was clad in a red shirt, and wore the features of Garibaldi. No writers so well know as the Jesuits how to make fun of Garibaldi's bit of ritualism, with his red shirt and poncho. A German war-song of the middle ages, ad dressed to St. Michael, was sung with loud applause, and sung encore. Cardinal Prince Schwarzenberg, the Archbishops of Salsburg and Cologne, the Bishop of Mainz, and the Prussian Military Bishop, with a retinue of counts and one prince, hallowed and graced the performance.2 In spite of these diversions, and the protests and assertions of perfect unanimity made by the clerical writers, the indica tions which had for some time been making themselves ob- 1 Civiltd, VII. ix. 103. 2 The first number of the Civiltd for 1876 (p. 104) contains an account of an audience in which the Pope made a speech to pilgrims from Brittany. Among other things, calling to mind how, on the day of Pentecost, the mockers said that the disciples were full of new wine, he went on to say that there were not wanting leaders of the revolution shameless enough to call by such names as a gang of topers the " respect able and truly Christian youths who, forsaking domestic comfort, came to expose themselves even to blood in defence of this holy see." Liver ani, as Canon of Santa Maria Maggiore, lamented his good opportunity, as living near barracks, of estimating the Christian virtues of the " GEcumenical Army." He says very hard things of them ; and as to drunkenness makes no scruple of describing the Irish members of the force, in particular, as being not unmindful of home traditions that are no rule of faith, and a bad rule of practice. HOPES OF THE OPPOSING BISHOPS 317 scurely felt of a Court party and an Opposition party, had at last emerged into painful consciousness on both sides. The idea of a sovereign above any party was too lofty for the place. One party, as we have seen stated by Sambin, was Rome and her Pontiff, whUe the other was an opposition, not against the opinions of InfallibUists, or the plans of a Cabinet, but against the Sovereign. Both sides had been very reluctant to acknowledge the reality of such antagonism, even long after its existence began to be tolerably evident. The Curia had nursed the hope, as we shall see, of all but unanimous adhesion to its preconcerted plans. It reckoned on the ascendant of the Pope when in presence, on that of the Sacred CoUege, on the sympathy of numbers, the witcheries of ceremony, the baits of promotion, and, if need should arise, on wholesome fear. On the other hand, even the prelates who most feared what was about to be done, disliked the idea of being in opposition, not only to the Curia, but to the Pontiff, and that on a personal question. They flattered themselves, moreover, that the good feeling of the Pope would lead him to moderate his prompters, and would not allow him to expose bishops to difficulties with their flocks and their governments, which they clearly foresaw. The men hoped that the general would modify his plans, and would win the campaign by strategy, without forcing them against stone walls. Even before the opening, a painful feeling, according to Friedrich, had seized upon some of the bishops, when studying the Rules of Procedure. Fessler, he states, had told Dinkel, of Augsburg, that some dogmatic Decrees would be forth coming on the opening day. Yet not a hint had been given as to what these Decrees might be ; and such secrecy on matters so solemn was taken UI.1 So far as the Curia was preparing a counter revolution, it acted only like any other pohtical body in keeping its plans hidden. But it was a different matter to make secret preparations for effecting changes in a creed that men had taught until they were grey- 1 Tagebuch, pp. 13, 14. 318 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE headed, and then to expect them to face the alternative of either accepting the change or ruining their official prospects. Scarcely had the opening session passed, when an address was signed by fourteen French prelates and the powerful Croatian Bishop Strossmayer, representing to the Pope in humble yet clear terms the danger of any restraint on the liberty of the Council. They did not rise in their places and move that the Council itself should frame its Rules of Procedure ; they did not even move to accept the Rules laid before it in the BuU Multiplices Inter, with certain specified amendments. Nothing short of this would have asserted the freedom of their Assembly. On the contrary, like aU men trained under absolutism, they did not know how to maintain their inherited rights against encroachment and at the same time to abide loyal and true ; but submitted, grumbling at their wrongs, and groping for some opening in the wall which shut them in. Had they attempted to bring forward such a motion as we have supposed, it would soon have been seen whether the assertions were or were not true which were made by English and American bishops about the Council being as free as the Senates of their own nations. Any one attempting to make such a proposal would have been informed that in the Pro-Synodal Congregation the Rules had been issued as a Papal Bull, and that in the first session the forms therein prescribed had been acted upon ; so that those Rules, not being an act of the Council, but of the Pope, were not subject to revision by the CouncU ; and, furthermore, that the Council had already practically adopted them. In fine, the prelates stood to some ideal Council in some such relation as we stand in to the Parliament ; we cannot propose a motion, but we can send in a petition. Yet our petition would go to the House itself, not to the Cabinet. It would be named in the hearing of the House, and noted on its records. The petition of the poor bishops could not be presented in the Assembly, no trace of it is in the Acta ; its only open way was to the steps of the throne. It was never answered, never mentioned in the official documents, NO RIGHT OF PROPOSITION 319 and the faithful who sought information in the accredited organs that rang with charges of misrepresentation against worldly ones, never received a hint of any such transaction. " Unless the thoroughness of examination and the perfect freedom of discussion are as clear as day," say the fifteen prelates, it is to be feared that the effect will be to lower religion in public esteem and to aggravate the troubles of the Church.1 The first point on which the petitioners fastened was the right of proposition. Yet, simple as this right was, they had not the courage to claim it. Perhaps even they were deceived, as Quirinus and many other writers evidently were,2 at the first glance, by the way in which the denial of that right was veUed over in the Rules of Procedure. The mode of putting it is one often employed in the documents of the Roman Court. When some serious restriction is to be announced, you may find at first a sentence or paragraph which conveys an impression of something different, perhaps opposite to what is to be the conclusion. Indeed, practised Liberal Catholics sometimes write as if with them it was a tacit canon of interpretation that when in Jesuit teaching you find a principle affirmed in the opening of a paragraph, that is the principle which is to be rendered nugatory by qualifications ere you reach the close ; and when you find a principle disclaimed, that is the principle which, under veUs and covers, is to be set up. In the Rules of Procedure the section on proposals did not say that no Bishop should be permitted to propose anything in the CouncU, which was the thing meant. To plainly say what was meant, would be to copy the Tower of Babel, the wicked modern Parliament. The section said that though the right of bringing forward proposals belonged to the Pope alone, he wished the bishops freely to exercise it. This sufficed to set many writing good news home. They did not wait to weigh the foUowing words. These showed that the right 1 Documenta ad III., Ab. II, p. 380. The exact date is not given, but only as " before the ioth of December." 2 See Quirinus, p. 62. 320 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE of proposition, handsomely announced to the Fathers of the Council, was just the right which everybody in the world possessed, that, namely, of forwarding a suggestion to the Pope. Curiously enough, even that common right was granted here only in a circuitous way, for the Pope himself named a Commission to receive propositions from the bishops, to consider them, and to report to him. If, after such report, he should wish any of them to come before the CouncU, he would send them forward. Most of the bishops, being unused to Parliamentary forms, began only by slow degrees to realize the fact that thus they had no right of proposition whatever. It was a good while before they became aware that they were simply in the position of private people. Anybody in Rome, or in Calcutta, could forward a suggestion to the Pope without going to a Royal Commission. The address of the fifteen bishops requests that authors of proposals shall be admitted to a hearing before the Com mission, and also that the latter shall be required to assign reasons when it reports against any proposal. But the bishops do not even ask leave to put their suggestions upon the books. That would, at least, have given members the right of letting their feUow members know what they wished to see done. The idea of entering a notice of motion would of course have been in that atmosphere not liberty but licence. They do, however, venture to suggest that some members of the Com mission might be elected by the CouncU. They also point out that secrecy cannot be really maintained. The address, as we have said, was not even answered. Hergenrother, the writer on whose authority Cardinal Manning requires us to rely, devotes some strength to this question. He begins by affirming that in Trent there was no fixed order. His proof for that assertion is that there is no written Code of Procedure, the record showing only the course actuaUy followed from time to time. He also asserts that the bishops in the Vatican Council had perfect liberty of proposition. He moreover informs those who learn from such as he, that in aU great assemblies the right of the THE CHURCH AND PROVIDENCE 321 President includes that of proposition, at least so far as to give him the decision, as to the order in which the proposals are taken.1 Hergenrother, moreover, affirms that Friedrich wished to deny the right of proposition to the Pope — a blunder arising from not distinguishing between a right and an ex clusive right. The Directing Congregation made a distinction as singular as was this failure to distinguish on the part of Hergenrother. It held that the Pope had the direct right of proposition, and the bishops the indirect right. But the fact was that they had no right of proposing to the Council whatever. They had no right beyond that of making a suggestion to the Pope, which, we repeat, anybody in the world could do ; the only difference being that the one sug gestion went before a Royal Commission, whUe the other did not. The Directing Congregation had been first of aU inchned to let the Fathers choose a committee of their own, but finaUy determined that the Pope himself should appoint a com mission. This was an arrangement open to objections which even they did not whoUy faU to see ; but the Court historian finds a perfect answer by saying that if a good proposal should rest unheeded the author of it would have the satisfaction of having done his duty, and he must trust to divine Provi dence, which would never faU the Church.2 Clouds of words were raised about this simple matter. The Catholics made solemn asseverations that the bishops had as perfect liberty of proposition as the members of any public body. The Liberal Catholics protested that they had not. They were cried down as slanderers. Hefele, a learned German, gave confused and even con tradictory advice as a consulter ; first contending that the bishops should have a right of proposition, and then suggest- 1 The statement of this writer is no worse than that of many bishops made in pastorals. It is this : Den Bischofen war vollstdndig ein Propositionsrecht zugestanden, welches nur der Controle der dafur be siimmten Deputation unterlag, dhnlich wie das auch zu Trient geschehen war. — Katholische Kirche und Christlicher Staat, p. 50. 2 Cecconi, p. 162, 21 322 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE ing the very arrangements finaUy adopted. Sanguineti, a Roman consulter, plainly stated what was to be aimed at, namely, that the Pope alone should have the right of public proposition, leaving to the bishops what he caUs the right of private proposition ; as the directing Congregation caUs it, of indirect proposition, or, as we caU it, of suggestion.1 The result, then, was that the bishops could not bring in any substantive motion, could not move for a subject to be taken into consideration, could not put a notice of motion on the books, could not move an amendment on what the President proposed, could not move the previous question, could not move to decline taking the matter into consideration, could not move to postpone it. AU that they could do was to speak to what the President proposed, to send suggested amendments before a committee, and finaUy to vote Yea or Nay upon the question, in the form into which that com mittee ultimately put it. No minutes of proceedings were printed, or even read day by day. No knowledge was aUowed 1 Cecconi, p. 160. Hefele, when recommending that the bishops should have the right of proposition, quotes what occurred at the Council of Trent, when the Archbishop of Capaccio-Vallo, on May io, 1546, repelled the claim of the Legate, Cardinal De Monte, to the exclusive right of proposition. The Archbishop cried, " What am I to do if anything occurs to me which ought to be proposed in this holy Council ? " To this De Monte replied, that if either his Grace or any other prelate wished to propose anything, they must submit it to the Legates, who would bring it forward, if they thought well. But should the latter unjustly, or without cause, refuse to bring it forward, then the author, whoever he was, should himself do so. But Hefele does not point to the fact that De Monte made this concession only after being driven to it by force of opposition. Earlier in the very same day, he had asserted the exclusive right of the Legates to propose, and had been confronted by the Cardinal Archbishop of Trent with the plump declaration that he did not want to take the right of proposition from the Legates, but he thought he also might propose what seemed to him right. Then the Legate and the Cardinal, who had been for some time engaged in a passage of arms, apologised to one another. That, however, did not prevent De Monte from again attempting to establish the claim of the chair to the exclusive right of proposition, by once more asserting it. It was on this second attempt that the Arch bishop of Cappacio-Vallo reclaimed, and then the Legate had, with ill grace, to give way, (See Acta Genuina, vol. i. pp. 100, 101.) WITNESS OF THE BISHOPS 323 to speakers even of the reports taken of their own speeches ; no sight of the reported speeches of others. Notwithstanding aU this, bishop after bishop returned from the CouncU to denounce in pastorals those who had said that they had not the liberty of proposition. Even our English. tongue had to make itself the vehicle of such statements for two mighty nations. Bishop bore witness to bishop, and they were true and all men were liars. Archbishop Manning told how bishops " of the freest country in the world " had said truly, " The liberty of our Congress is not greater than the liberty of the Council." J We fear that American bishops might have quoted similar declarations from English ones. It is for members of Congress and of Parliament to judge. La Liberte du Concile is a tract which, Friedrich says, if not written by Darboy, was inspired by him.2 Only fifty copies were printed during the Council, for distribution ex clusively among the Cardinals, and with the strictest in junctions of secrecy. The whole is given in the Documenta ad Illustrandum.3 It is introduced by an article from the Moniteur of the 14th February, 1870. One of its earliest sentences compresses the secret history of Cecconi into a few words. " The first unhappy thought, and that from which the CouncU now suffers, was the wish, so to speak, to make the CouncU beforehand, and to make it without the bishops." It is right to mention that M. VeuiUot says that this writer recounts iU, reasons worse, and draws inferences worst of all.4 For two years, complains this writer, the bishops had been refused any programme. They had not been afforded any possibUity of studying questions about to be raised, or of preparing themselves to discuss them.5 It would seem that the writer did not know that the preparations had extended over five years instead of two. He says that the Council had not made its Rules of Procedure ; the Pope had imposed them. 1 Priv. Pet., Part III. p. 32. 2 Doc. ad III. ii. p. vi 3 I. 129. 4 I- P- 275- •¦* This complaint is ably put in the Rheinischer Merkur, first number. 324 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE It had not chosen one of its officers, not even a scrutineer ; the Pope had selected them aU beforehand. The reason for the restraints imposed on the liberty of the bishops was stated by M. VeuiUot as being to take away the liberty of evil, which the writer considers an insult to the bishops. We may remark that this is a principle which, had it been acted upon by the great government above us aU, would have precluded every question as to the origin of evU. This tract affirms that the Commission for Proposals was composed exclusively of declared partisans of the Court. That statement is not quite accurate. Rauscher was a mighty instrument of the Curia in its ordinary aggressions on the civil power, but too sensible to approve of its present projects. Cardinal Corsi also, though at last he voted with the majority, was all along reputed as averse to the definition of infallibility. The next complaint is that the Committees for the important subjects of Dogma, Dis cipline, the Rehgious Orders, and Oriental affairs, are per manent, chosen once for aU, and chosen by a strictly party vote, excluding every FaUibUist. Thus, is it urged, only ninety-six bishops out of nearly eight hundred would ever know anything of those real deliberations which principally determine the results of the Council. These Committees would have to decide upon aU alterations to be made in Drafts of Decrees after the first Drafts had been discussed by the bishops generaUy. They would have the sole responsibUity of bringing them forward in the definitive shape in which they must be voted upon, Yea or Nay. Thus, he repeats, seven hundred out of eight hundred are absolutely excluded from a share, at any time whatever, in the most important operations of the CouncU. The indignation of the author would not have been lessened had he known that this par ticular point had been carefuUy weighed by the Nine. They at first resolved to allow the CouncU to elect, as had been done at Trent, committees for each particular matter as it arose. It was, however, subsequently foreseen that this regulation might open the way to the election of men who were not safe, After a discussion, a man who had displayed MANOZUVRE FOR AN ELECTION 325 ability in treating the matter in hand might be elected on the committee for that reason alone ! If, on the other hand, committees were chosen once for all, it would be easy to secure the exclusion of wrong names in that one election, and no opportunity of changing them would ever arise.1 The writer of La Liberte du Concile proceeds to say that a number of bishops urgently requested the Pope, in order to ensure a wise selection of these aU-controUing committees, to direct that the Fathers should be divided into groups, and should in these discuss pending questions separately, on the plan adopted in the Bureaux of the French and Italian Chambers. Thus the Fathers, who for the most part were perfect strangers to one another, would in a little time learn who were the capable men, and would be in a position to make a proper selection. This appeal, probably the one we have aheady mentioned, was not even answered. The lords of wide dioceses, accustomed to rule their clergy with mUitary authority and to face statesmen with consider able pretensions, were now reduced to struggle for very smaU liberties. They attempted to form themselves into groups, by nation or by language. So far as the French were con cerned, this arrangement failed. Each of their two Cardinals, De Bonnechose and Matthieu, received a group in his own house. Cardinal De Bonnechose would not consent that all the French bishops should meet together. Even when they divided, he went for advice to AntoneUi, who intimated that they ought not to meet in larger groups than fifteen or twenty. The effect of all this was, that when the time for making arrangements for the election of the committees came, they had no concert among themselves ; and the writer states that after that election, the annoyances confronting Cardinal Matthieu were so great, that he felt obliged for a time to leave Rome. Hereupon the bishops who had previously met at his house resolved to go to that of Cardinal De Bonne chose, who had, for once, to receive them ; but he again Cecconi, pp. 181, 182. 326 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE consulted AntoneUi, and declared that this first general meet ing should also be the last. The bishops desired to select the best men of their own nation to be nominated as members of the permanent com mittees. The Curia, however, had provided for aU that. The "ticket " of Cardinal De Angelis, as it would be called in America, was the counter move. The German and Hun garian bishops had shown more cohesion than the French.. They met together, and made a selection of the principal men from their own number ; but that resulted in nothing. The Curia had selected those whom it preferred, setting aside the men who stood high with their fellow-countrymen, and putting forward those who with them would have had no chance. An official list was prepared bearing the name of Cardinal De Angelis. Of course the bishops in partibus, the missionary bishops, and aU the mere dependents of the Court, voted for the official list ; and thus the whole of the four permanent committees were composed, as the secret pre paratory commission had been, exclusively of the nominees of the Curia. The Jesuit Press gloried over this result. M. VeuiUot said that the Committee on Faith was an echo of the great commission appointed by the Pope. Sambin re corded the triumph, with satisfaction, for permanent history. The result showed that the Court could count on about 550 votes.1 De Angelis was appointed to the vacant post of Chief President, in room of Reisach. Cardinal Schwarzenberg was not on any committee, Hohenlohe was out of the question. Even the Archbishop of Cologne was only on a petty com mittee for granting leave of absence. But Bishop Senestrey, of Regensburg, the author of the throne-upsetting speech, was on the all-important committee for dogma. This manoeuvre excited strong indignation amongst aU shades of the marked men. They found themselves shut off from such a part in deliberations as would have been granted by any worldly cabinet to an honourable Opposition. Then, the mode of securing the result by the expedients of a political 1 A cion, .68. SPECIMEN OF ROMAN MOCKERY 327 election caused bitter recoUections of frequent admonitions, given both verbally and in the Press, not to reason about the CouncU as an ordinary human assembly, but to evince a worthy confidence in the aU-guiding power of the Holy Ghost. The Rheinischer Merkur remarked that the Romans had a saying, that at the beginning of a conclave the devil reigns, then the world carries aU before it, and only at the last does the Holy Ghost turn both out and regulate things according to His own wUl. This genuine specimen of Roman mockery is applied to the Council by the Merkur saying that as yet the third stage had certainly not set in.1 The selection, said the Merkur, of committees was one-sided and narrow- minded. The Archbishop of Paris and the Bishop of Orleans saw themselves thrown aside, and nominal bishops put in the places they ought to have occupied. The German bishops, who had strongly confided in the moderation of the Curia, found that no amount of trimming would avaU ; nothing short of a sound profession on the question of infaUibUity. ViteUeschi says that the clearest, most sincere and disinterested opposition was that of the German bishops. They knew what they meant, and also knew that they expressed the coUective sense of their people ; besides, they always acted with moderation. He ascribes this moderation to two causes, namely, the fact that they consciously did express the views of their people, and that they were, more or less, influenced by Protestant modes of thinking. We confess that we see httle proof that any German bishops but the Curialistic ones were clear. We should rather have said that they were at sea. As to the moderation, however, ViteUeschi adds that no such moderating influence of Protestant opinion appeared in the case of the English prelates. " Several bishops, with Manning at their head, more Catholic than the Pope, are noted for their Ultramontanism " (p. 45). He adds, that even the Irish bishops were less uniformly InfaUibihsts than the English. Of the Belgians, he says that some naturaUy took the more liberal direction. De Merode, weU known in 1 Vol. i. p. 2, 328 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Rome as a Court prelate, placeman, and speculator, like Dupanloup, had been a champion of the temporal power, but now proved to be an anti-infaUibihst. Et tu, Brute, fili mi ! exclaims the Roman. As to the Spaniards, ViteUeschi says that they had been trained in the school of Torquemada ; and if they were content with being only Ultramontanes, that was something gained. These are the divines of whom Quirinus says that if ordered by the Pope to vote that there were four persons in the Trinity, they would do it. Vitelleschi remarks that the prelates of the United States were simpler than their brethren, and less practised in ecclesiastical politics. Their want of any political importance at home, he believes, had predisposed them to warmer sympathy with Curialistic views than might have been expected from them. Never theless, it proved in time that, under the forms of ecclesiastical discipline, the spirit of citizens of a free country did now and then make its appearance among them. Another of his remarks is, that, with the exception of Portugal, most of the bishops from smaU countries were in the interest of the Curia. Speaking of Mermillod, from Geneva, Quirinus says that he " rivals Manning in his fanatical zeal for the new dogma." Of course the Italian bishops, with very few exceptions, were InfaUibilists, and those from South America were all upon the same side. The bulk of the Opposition bishops were German, Hungarian, and French, reinforced by some of the older ones from Ireland, a few of the English, a good many of the North American, and only about twenty of the entire body of the Italian. The various groups had now everything to stimulate them to put their proposals into shape. Those of the Curia were in shape already. They naturaUy took the old direction of conforming the creed to innovations in practice. At Trent this was done with many innovations, which must either fall into discredit or be lifted above dispute. In this way was the demand for a reform of the Church to raise her to the level of the creed, met by a determination to bring down the creed to the level of the .Church. The two movements were PLANS OP GERMAN BISHOPS 329 confronted. Reformation, on the one side, renovating the condition of the Church ; and Conformity, on the other side, adulterating the creed. Both together resulted in the wide separation which has been witnessed ever since. The necessity now pressing sprang from different causes. No party had arisen to chaUenge the primacy of the Pope, even in the form of aU but unlimited monarchy, into which, under cover of the gentle word " primacy," it had been monstrously developed. On the contrary, indeed, of late years the faithful had shown increasing submissiveness, proportioned to the dangers sur rounding the Pope. But the Papacy itself was moving for constitutional powers which demanded a new dogmatic basis. In comparison with the magnificence of the scheme of one fold and one shepherd, the notions of the German bishops, as disclosed by Friedrich, are an illustration of how adminis trators potter when immense issues press for solution. While the architects were designing a new coliseum, the joiners and stone-cutters were great upon cusps and corbels. In answer to the seventeen questions issued in Rome at the centenary of St. Peter, the German bishops had deliberated at Fulda for five days. Marriage, as a mine yielding richly to the local authorities in fees, and to the Curia in dispensation taxes, and also as a means of power over females, and over the education of chUdren, was naturally one of the main points. Another point included the offences for which parish priests should be liable to deposition. On this the bishops advised the addition of two offences to the list — notorious fornication and open concubinage. Hints were thrown out about abolishing all benefices, as they were said to be feudal. The clergy could not be fuUy mobilized but by the abolition of permanent appointments. The whole effect of the questions was to bring out the exist ence in Germany of too great toleration of intercourse with Protestants ; intercourse to a degree not consistent with the militant footing on which things were to be put. This apphed to christenings, weddings, burials, and other events of life, where the milk of human kindness sometimes wUl 330 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE overflow, and men wiU forget that they belong to a society which scarcely regards those who are not of it as moraUy entitled to existence. The bishops naturaUy desired that the number of causae majores, or reserved cases, should be curtailed, as that would increase their own freedom and power. They also expressed a wish that censures should not be en forced against Catholic judges who found themselves obliged to pronounce sentences adverse to the canon law. This they advised in order to avoid the exclusion of Catholics from the judicial bench. They moreover suggested that unreason ably contracting debts and habitual drunkenness should be added to the list of causes warranting the removal of a priest. They did touch a few minute points of a properly religious kind, connected with the forgiveness of sins, ordination, and other questions. Friedrich remarks that these ideas tended to the omnipotence of the bishops by sacrificing the parish priests. This object, however, was a natural complement of the sacrifice of the bishops to the Curia. If the bishop is himself an absolute dependent on the Court, all his subordinates must be left to his mercy. The Curia knew how to lure on the bishops to the forfeiting of their own franchises, by using their love of power against the franchises of the priests. Friedrich gravely says that the movableness of the parish priests would not cure the moral evils complained of. It is not by outward correction that a man becomes morally better, but by the ennobling of the inner man, which, alas! is so little aimed at among the clergy. When a French bishop can say in the Senate, " My clergy are a regiment ; they are bound to march, and they do march," he only shows how the Christian spirit has evaporated from among the hierarchy. A few weeks before Friedrich left home he had conversed with DoUinger upon the seventeen questions, and he says that they were the only points respecting the CouncU on which they did converse together. What the aged provost said, observes Friedrich, wUl always remain in my memory. "On one occasion, Windischmann remarked in my presence SEGESSER'S PLAN 331 and that of others, * If I was compelled to answer according to the contents of the ordinary's book, whether celibacy should be abolished or not, I should have to speak uncon- ditionaUy for its abolition.' " We have seen, in : a previous chapter, that some of the lower clergy had indicated plans of considerable range, but they pointed in a direction in which Rome was incapable of going. Great attention was attracted by a project, appear ing with the name of a learned layman in Switzerland, Dr. Segesser.1 His charter had no less than twelve points, which are well worth a moment's notice. 1. He held that the Church, in having, for the first time in her history, declined to invite the co-operation of governments with the Council, must now declare for the separation of Church and State. 2. The Council must be a Reform Council in the fullest sense of the word. 3. It must certify the freedom of its me.nbers to the world. 4. It must be declared that all ./ho believe in the redeeming work of Christ belong to the Christian communion. 5. No dogma must be added unless urgently called for, not only by theologians, but by the faithful. 6. The primacy being divine, but the Papacy being only a joint product of Roman jurisprudence and theology, the dogma of the pontifical infaUibUity of the Pope, which would lead back to theocratic ideas, would set the Church and State on a war of mutual annihilation. Therefore it is the absolute duty of the Church to declare herself completely released from the theocratic ideas of the great Popes of the middle ages, 7. The question of infallibility must not be passed over in sUence, but must be solemnly declared to be in opposition to the right idea of the constitution of the Church. 8. In mixed questions, such as those of the Church and State, laymen should have some voice. 9. The temporal power must be treated as a local Roman *¦ Reviewed in the Liter aturbia't, \o '. v p, 157. 332 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE institution, and not confounded with the affairs of the universal Church. io. Freedom of teaching, of organization, and of worship, and equality with all other communions, must be proclaimed ; and the Church would do well if she gave up all claim to the immunity of her property, and placed it entirely under the control of the common law. n. The Index to be given up. * 12. We give this in full : " The Christian State was a great ideal, but a yet greater is a State of Christians. To attain to the last the Church must not domineer, but must possess freedom, and give it." The language of this Liberal Catholic, brought up among German Protestants on the one hand and Swiss ones on the other, would sound altogether alien to the ears of the Cardinals, and would only deepen their painful impression of the evU influences of Protestant teaching upon the children of the Church. Enough occurred at the Council to show that, even among the bishops, there were one or two who would have dared to propose some of the points in Dr. Segesser's scheme, had the members of the Council been permitted to make proposals. CHAPTER III Further Party Manoeuvres — Election of Permanent Committees — Bull of Excommunications — Various Opinions of it — Position of AntoneUi — No serious Discussion desired — Perplexities of the Bishops — Reisach's Code suppressed — It may reappear — Attitude of Governments AUTHORS differ as to the actors in an incident which marked the second General Congregation, on December 14. Quirinus and Fromman say that Darboy and Stross- mayer (Friedrich says that Dupanloup and Strossmayer) attempted to speak on the Rules of Procedure, but were stopped by Cardinal De Luca, on the ground that what the Holy Father had decreed could not be discussed. The official writers at the time said not a word of the incident, nor is it named in the Acta Sanctae Sedis, nor in Frond. Thus the bishops had now ascertained their position, but too late. Quirinus naturally says that had the assembly been, in some measure, prepared for the Rules, there would have been opposition ; but good care had been taken that the assembly should not be prepared, and should not have any chance of offering opposition. The first gleam of hope, adds this author, excited by the announcement that the bishops would be aUowed to propose measures, had speedily vanished. Lord Acton says (p. 63) : " The bishops felt themselves in an entangled position. Some began to speak of going home. Some complained that the Rules foreclosed questions involv ing divine rights, and said that they felt bound to put even the existence of the Council to stake." The election of the Permanent Committee on Dogma was the great work of the day. Archbishop Kenrick's Latin note 1 states that lithographed lists were distributed some days >- Documenta ad Illustrandum, i. 245. 334 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE before the election, with the inscription, To the honour of Mary, conceived Immaculate ; and that these lists were re commended by the name of Cardinal De Angelis. Four hundred of the votes sent in gave the list entire. It was by these tactics that every FaUibUist, without exception, was ex cluded from the committees. But Canon Pelletier, who wrote what in Frond passes for the history of the Council and is a good history of the ceremonies and the dresses, declares that the election proved the perfect freedom of the Fathers, for though all the names on the official list were chosen, they were not brought in according to the order in which they stood on that list. The French prelates of the minority were especiaUy incensed, both against their leaders and against those whose superior tactics had frustrated their unskilful attempts to unite. Every Frenchman felt that aU who re presented the traditions and the spirit of the Roman Cathohc Church in France were now, in Rome, placed under a species of ostracism. The Fathers left this exciting sitting with another Bull in their hands. Again Letters Apostolic to the present ! The Acta Sanctae Sedis affirm that the work of pre paring this BuU could not be got through in time to send it to the Fathers before the Council. Its title was gentle. It was a Bull to Limit the Censures of the Church. Quirinus mentions a mission undertaken by Cardinal Pitra, a French man, with the intention of bringing the prelates of his own country into accord with the Curia. This he foUowed up by a similar attempt with the German ' i shops. Pitra began by describing Dupanloup to the lattei as "a mischievous teacher of error," but he was stopped, and told that the Germans agreed with Dupanloup. A favourite topic of conversation now was the chance of disorganizing the Opposition. The first checks appeared to have had the effect of consolidating it, but the resources of the Court were generally assumed to be efficacious. Over and over again was it asserted that the hope of a robe of some distinguishing hue, or of a title on the list of domestic pre lates of the Pope, would win over almost any bishop, an OFFENCES LATAE SENTENTIAE 335 assertion which proved not to be correct.1 Quirinus, in common with German writers generally, speaks of the honour of being on that list as one that ought to be coveted rather by menials than by dignitaries ; and Italians may often be heard saying much the same thing. Again, faculties enabling a bishop to give absolution, or dispensations, in certain re- seryed cases, yield to him both power and fees. " Nine bishops out of ten want favours " — an assertion of Quirinus — seems bold, but it was written in Rome. The Bull professing to limit the censures of the Church, was found to be another case of a winning title to a dreadful document. The censures with which it dealt were only a portion out of Rome's store, those, namely, under which one falls by the very act of committing the offence, without any need of trial or sentence. They are called offences Latae Sententiae, or judged already. He that confesses to one such act is, ipso facto, excommunicate, or, in the less heinous cases ' " suspended." The BuU, as we have said, professed to limit the number of these cases ; many of which represent multi tudes in aU Roman Catholic countries, who must either shun the confessional, knowing that in that tribunal they are judged aheady, or must go to it to find themselves pronounced out side of the kingdom of grace, and incapable of restoration except by special powers granted from Rome, which always imply special fees. It was freely said, This is a re-issue of the Bull In Coena Domini, the terrible syllabus of excommunications, at one time annually published ; a custom which had ceased since the days of Clement XIV. This cessation was often cited as indicating greater mUdness in the spirit of the Roman Court. In the new BuU Apostolicae Sedis these excommunica tions reappeared. They were under different heads. Three classes were reserved to bishops, so that no ordinary priest could release from them. Twenty-nine classes were reserved 1 Of those domestic prelates the Annuario Pdnlificio for 1870 gives above two hundred and thirty names ; the list in 1875 is over four hundred, in the Gerarchia Cattolica e la Famiglia Pontificia, 336 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE to the Pontiff, so that no bishop could release from them. Four classes were not reserved to any one.1 Some bishops declared that they found excommunications here of which they had never been aware up to that moment. ViteUeschi said that if some found in old books were omitted, the BuU re-enacted aU of the penal code of the Church that was in force. According as men looked at this document, from a fiscal, hierarchical, or monarchical point of view, their apprecia tion of it varied. Beyond excommunicating aU heretics and heretical books, with the readers, abettors, and so forth, it dealt with few matters which any true theologian would not gladly banish from his bounds, as trespassers. The hierarchical aspect of the BuU was striking. More than one of its sections pronounced excommunication upon the sin of appealing from any act of the Pope to a future General CouncU. This was the mortal blow to the doctrine that a Council could judge, and even depose, the Pope, as CouncUs had done. Being issued in the face of a General Council actually sitting, no alternative remained but that of conflict between the Council and the Pope, or else final abandonment of this once vigorous doctrine. The defiant crowings of the GaUican cock were for ever hushed by this one grip in the claws of the Vatican eagle. This Bull, as compared with the action of the CouncU of Constance, which deposed two Popes and itself elected one, served to measure the decline of the episcopal and the growth of the pontifical power in the Church. Many of the bishops were old enough to have maintained the doctrine that the Council was above the Pope, against Pro testants, who innocently accused aU Roman Catholics of being Papists. If any one of them thought of standing by the old flag, what was he to do ? To put a notice of motion on the books ? That was not permitted. To send a suggestion to the Twenty-six ? It might as weU go into his own waste- paper basket as into theirs. To speak upon the point ? That 1 Though issued during the Council, this Bull is not, Uke the others, printed in the Acta. It is in the Freiburg edition, p. 77 ; and also in Acta Sanctae Sedis, v. p. 287. DIVERS EXCOMMUNICATIONS 337 would be out of order, for bishops were to speak only on matters proposed, and nothing was to be proposed but what the Pope proposed. Moreover, even if in speeches irrelevant matter should be aUowed, such matter as that now contem plated would be at once pronounced rebellion. It would be an attempt to discuss what the Holy Father had already decreed. Thus the question of the relative judicial powers of the single Bishop of Rome, and of all the other bishops of the world coUectively, was settled by an arbitrary sentence, uttered in the face of all the bishops assembled in conclave ; and their assembly, though called a General Council, had no liberty to canvass the decision ! It was a hard dUemma for a man to be placed in who had a sense either of human rights or of a divine office to defend. But the hand of power was over the bishops. No man who opposed even embryo Decrees could ever reasonably hope for a hat ; and he who should venture to attack a Bull actually issued must expect to see his mitre reduced to an empty dignity by the withdrawal of his faculties. So the bishops saw a BuU which " thrust the souls entrusted to them by thousands out of the Church " ; and what could they do ? " The more excommunications, the more perplexed and tor mented consciences," cries Quirinus — reminding us of what might often be heard in the old times from thoughtful men in Rome. The whole effort of the priests, they would say, is to keep the conscience in agony, or at least in unrest ; for this drives people to the confessor, and hence no end of gains. A diplomatist regarded the political aspects of the BuU as serious.1 Excommunicating men for an appeal to a General CouncU was, as he took it, both the forerunner and the ap plication of the dogma of infallibility. Excommunicating aU who should punish bishops, or higher officers of the Church, without making an exception for any breach whatever of law, and, moreover, excommunicating any who, directly or in directly, should obstruct the execution of Papal mandates, were not only blows but stabs at all civil authority. The 1 Tagebuch, p. 32. 22 338 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE diplomatist argued that the way in which the Pope abolished privileges granted by his predecessors was a poor pledge of the value of any engagements into which the Papacy might enter. The diplomatist ought to have known that the immunity of the clergy from lay jurisdiction was an essential part of the restoration to be accomplished. He ought also to have known that " the free communication " of the Pope with the faithful, or his right to promulge in aU countries his decrees as their highest law, was equaUy essential. The excommunication, not only of heretics, but of all who should harbour or defend them, ay, or should even read their books, led ViteUeschi to raise a question for young theologians, whether the Pope has not excommunicated himself and his own government, seeing he had done more than harbour heretics in an inn, by aUowing them a church outside the Porta del Popolo. The Bull, said some, is only one of a series of measures to be framed, assuming the infallibility of preceding Popes. The dispute as to Bulls which taught any dogma in theology or morals must for ever end. The very points which Liberal Catholics had alleged to be without binding force must be beyond appeal bound on earth, and of course ratified in heaven. A little circumstance not without significance was the fact that, in publishing this document, the Civiltd did not, as it usually does with official documents, furnish a translation of the Latin ; and the Stimmen, for Germany, followed the example. In Germany or other Protestant countries an unfavourable impression might be taken of the means to be resorted to for restoring Papal ascendancy when, in the terrible category of offences judged already, without power to remit the sentence being reserved to any one, even to the Vicar of God, were found the following deeds, which many Christians would do with as cool a sense of duty as that with which under slave- laws they would have befriended a fugitive slave : " Injuring or intimidating Inquisitors, informers, witnesses, or other ministers of the Holy Office ; tearing up or burning the papers DIVERS EXCOMMUNICATIONS 339 of its sacred tribunal ; or giving to any of the aforesaid aid, counsel, or favour." If the day ever comes for attempting to put this law in force on the now happy soil of England, blessed among her sons or daughters wiU that one be who first has grace to endure the torments of the Holy Office rather than not break the wicked law ! The fiscal bearing of the Bull would be the one first to strike and most to occupy the Romans. Among men of the different orders, it would occasion many a chat over questions of sin, sacraments, crime, communion, dispensation, remission, and redemption from purgatory, and of the fees flowing from each respectively. Quirinus represents the Jesuits as behold ing both the present and the future in rosy hues. The bishops would not be able to give absolution in the reserved cases, but the Jesuits, in very many of them, would have plenary power. Hence the bishops and the parochial clergy would suffer both in fees and influence, while the confessionals of their powerful rivals would be thronged. " So, each of those multiplied excommunications is worth its weight in gold to the Order, and helps to bufld colleges and professed houses." -* Against the complaints which greeted the BuU, the Civiltd aUeged that it contained nothing new, and above all that it had been posted up in the customary places in Rome, and was therefore already the law of the Church universal. It was, on the other hand, boldly alleged that there were many new cases of suspension, interdict, or excommunication. Cardinal Anto neUi, however, said that there were three hundred excom munications which were not included in the Bull. Lord Acton (p. 70) quotes a passage from the organ of the Arch bishop of Cologne, which shows that a good many more will have to be added before all actions are placed under perfect control. The Bull, it is said, does not prohibit " the works of Jews, since Jews are not heretics ; nor does it prohibit heretical pamphlets and journals, for these are not books; nor is the hearing of heretical books when read aloud forbidden, since hearing is not reading." 1 Quirinus, p. ic6. 346 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Some doubt hangs round the feeling of Cardinal AntoneUi as to the Council. It was often asserted that he had been opposed to it from the first, and was still decidedly so. This seems very probable. A worldly-wise man, capable of amass ing a colossal fortune amid the ruins of a petty State, was hardly likely to believe that the d priori fabric of Tarquini and the other Jesuits, and the hot-headed schemes of the Pope, were solid enough to bear what was to be built upon them, or would lead to anything but defeat of the Papacy, and misery to the nations. But in contradiction to this view, Quirinus says that AntoneUi was too good a statesman and financier not to see the gain that would flow from the new dogma in power and revenue. The new dogma would doubt less enormously increase the power of the Curia within the Church and over all her organizations. It would thus increase the facility of bringing pressure to bear on a government by threats of disaffection and agitation ; but it would at the same time arouse all statesmen, and eventually all inteUigent men, except real disciples, against this sacerdotal empire. The most likely explanation of any zeal AntoneUi may have shown for the new order of things would perhaps be that while retaining his own view of the risks about to be run, he knew that what was to be was to be, and determined to make the best of it. Papers immediately preceding the Bull in the pages of the Civiltd1 seemed to indicate steadiness in the purpose either to bend the States or to break them. One article rang the changes on the old theme of the royal placet or exequatur, " the crime whereby ecclesiastical judgments are submitted to lay examination." " The Church," it adds, " is not a foreign power, and hence concludes that the State has no right of precaution jus cavendi, in respect of her." The internal power on which the Curia counts, in any country, being that of threatening political agitation, the denial to the State of all right of precaution is essential to the fuU application of the principle of the Pope's " free communication " with aU his 1 VII. ix. p. 189, FORECASTS OF COMBAT 341 subjects. A physical impediment to the promulging of a Bull was, in old times, not more a precaution than is, in our day, the principle that the law of the land is supreme. Just as the physical impediment was unlawful, so is the legislative one ; both stay the free course of " the divine word." The old dukes, kings, and emperors, knowing that in the popular conscience the law of the Pope ranked above all civil law, put a check upon the promulgation of his Bulls. We say, Promulge what you please, but the law of the land is the only law in the land. " Here is the ground on which the future battle is to be fought out." Just between this article and the catalogue of excommuni cations came a discussion on unfulfilled prophecy. The Jesuit Father, Soprano, had, by comments on the prophecies of Balaam, Daniel, and the Apocalypse, clearly proved (according to his reviewer) that the city of Rome was destined of God to be in perpetuity the centre of the Catholic Church. The war against the kingdom of Christ was to fail, because " she " could not lose her empire. But certain points as to the issue of the war now raging between the innovators and the king dom of Christ, were open to inquiry — " What dynasties will survive, what forms of government will prevail, what end wUl such and such kingdoms come to ? Finally, we may ask whether the Holy City, the mount of God, the capital of the Catholic world, Rome, may for a time fall under the power of sinners and parricides, to be outraged by fire and sword, and defaced with crimes." But, on the other hand, as to Rome being the stable domicile of catholicity, we might doubt of that only if the mount which cannot be moved could be leveUed with the ground. This expositor is true to the old interpretation that the Babylon of the Apocalypse is Rome, but that was the Pagan Rome, which " fell with the victory of Constantine." It wUl be observed that he takes the possibUity of a temporary fall of the sacred Rome into the hand of the enemy as but an episode in a war that is to continue through a long series of years. 342 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Since 1870, such forecasts as the above, when uttered, have not the same triumphant tone. Nevertheless, they are now as clearly expressed as ever. But at the time of which we speak, if the bishops only read what was written for their learning they could not doubt as to the kind of service which was expected of them in the future. Friedrich intimates that they did not read it, when he relates that, in trying to en lighten one of them, he told him that the only way to under stand the Council was to study it with the Civiltd Cattolica in one's hand. But some of them showed a solicitude that could not be explained on any ground short of a perception of the dangers on which the Pope was running the hierarchy. They evidently did not take the view either of those who thought that the Pope, erected into a vice-God, was about to become the real as well as the titular governor of the world, or the view of those who looked on such dreams as matter to laugh at. The calculations which produced the Crusades and the Thirty Years' War, were dreams ; but could the Church afford the indemnity which mankind would exact for the miseries of such another struggle ? December 16 marked the second failure in the organization of the Council. The first was the irremediable one of the absence of Cardinal Reisach, and now, before serious discussion had begun, the third General Congregation had to be post poned from the 16th to the 20th,1 because nobody could be heard in the hall. So six days passed without a sitting. Debates were actuaUy to take place — a thing which had neither been desired nor expected. The hall was a good place for spectacle, but a bad place for a parliament. In vain do bishops frown and editors sneer at the writers who said that the Curia had not expected much discussion. Cecconi comes to the support of the " liars," as in official indignation they were called who told just what there was to teU (p. 180) — It was a deeply-rooted belief of the Directing Congregation that but rarely would anything have to be referred to_the com- 1 Tagebuch, p. 27 EXPECTED AGREEMENT OF BISHOPS 343 mittees of the Council, because the Directing Congregation so well knew how profound had been the attention given by the Preparatory Commissions, that it seemed extremely difficult to believe that the Drafts so prepared should not be received with general favour by the Fathers. This, in fact, is the excuse put forward by the Nine for not having given the bishops a word to say to the Drafts of Decrees before they were confronted with them, as being already in a form to be voted upon. The practice at Trent had been to state the question as a question. Then it was first discussed by the doctors in the presence of the bishops, who after that appointed a smaU committee of their own number to put resolutions into shape. The Council pro ceeded to discuss the Drafts so prepared, amending and again amending them, until they were in a form on which (if the subject was doctrine) almost every one could agree. It was now, however, cooUy assumed that so complete had been the work of the secret commissions that the bishops would not raise any difficulties. Great variety of opinion, say the Nine, would probably be rare, seeing that the matters to be treated would be already prepared, with great accuracy, by the special Commission, formed by his Holiness, in conjunction with the Directing Congregation (Cecconi, p. 180). Cecconi repeats that the great confidence felt in the ex ceUence of the work of the theologians had generated in the majority of the members of the Directing Congregation this conviction. He is candid enough to give the reason for bringing the Drafts ready made into fuU assembly, which was to prevent them from being exposed to the influences which a restricted number of prelates might exert. That amounts to saying that the able men whom a free assembly would have chosen to consider and digest its forms of re solution, were not to be aUowed any chance of unitedly study ing the forms prepared in secret for them. The Court would bring its own plans, with aU their detaUs and complex notes, before the fuU assembly, which could never thoroughly sift them, and in which the majority was assured. 344 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE WhUe in almost everything else the rejection of parha mentary forms was commended, as becoming an assembly which had to contend against both the principles and results of parhamentary government, the practice of our own Houses in bringing in BiUs ready drawn was pleaded in favour of the course taken in preparing extended drafts of dogmatic decrees. But our Parliament has never yet been caUed together to vote that laws are as good if issued by the Crown, without the advice of Lords and Commons, as with it. Nor has it ever been asked to pass a measure which neither it nor any succeeding Parliament could recall. Our Parlia ment is never asked to discuss a BiU without first having the right to say whether it shaU or shaU not be brought in. It never finds a BiU before it which, if it pleases, it may not refer to a special committee. Any member can move the rejection or the postponement of the whole, can move the omission or amendment of any part, and can take the sense of the House. None of these things could be done at the Vatican CouncU. The bishops could make Latin speeches in a row, first on the Draft as a whole, and then, in a second row, on the parts. But only twenty-four of their number could ever put a hand to the amending of the proposed statute. With those twenty- four were associated irresponsible persons, non-members. As that mixed body finaUy shaped the propositions, must the Fathers vote upon them, with a Yea or Nay that sealed the creed of their churches for ever. It was not wonderful that the Curia should believe in the perfection of the Roman theology, since they took their own government for perfect, and the capital for a model city of the saints. The German estimate of the Court theology is indicated by Quirinus when he says that "though the Pope had four hundred theologians, theology is now rare, very rare, in Rome." He goes on to assert that if one should say that ability to read the Greek Testament and the Greek Fathers in the original was a necessary qualification of a theologian, " he would be ridiculed." As to the divinity even of the bishops, the evidence of Quirinus js little more flatter- A BULKY CREED 345 ing than that of Friedrich ; but the discussions yet to come wiU show that men of real power were not wanting. The first Scheme or Draft of Decrees on dogma now appeared. It was nothing less than a book of one hundred and forty quarto pages, containing eighteen chapters and fifty-four para graphs. Frond makes it folio and of 131 pages. The Rheinischer Merkur quotes a Catholic journal which in admiration of this masterpiece says that when adopted by the Council it would form a text-book. Yet this mass of divinity, any phrase, almost any word of which might affect the vital truths of religion, was put before the bishops with only a few days to study it, and they were expected to vote it as an irreformable creed, to be ready for promulga tion, as bound on earth and bound in heaven, on January 6, the day decreed in the first session ! Friedrich, looking at this bulky pamphlet, cries, AU through we have the language of the schools ; any one familiar with the Jesuit writings sees at once by whom it has been prepared. Graf W., a Roman prelate, paid Friedrich a visit arrayed in all his vestments and decorations. Surprised at such a display by a stranger, Friedrich asked himself, Does he want to make an impression upon me, or to excite a longing for simUar clothes ? The conversation turned upon infaUibUity, and the Count Monsignore said that it would be carried through ; for when the Curia had committed itself to any thing, it was not to be balked. Friedrich, saying that for his part he had nothing to do but to speak according to his conscience, and that as a priest he knew weU what must be his course when once the point was decided, went on to state that, not having his eye on a canonry or a bishopric, and being happy in his independent position as a professor in the university, he felt free. This surprised the Curialist, but Friedrich in turn was stUl more surprised when the man in soft raiment and living in kings' houses said that it was other wise with him. He belonged to the Roman prelacy, and if he meant to continue in it, he must do what he was bid. The. German doctor was struck by hearing people assure 346 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE him that life was tolerably safe in Rome if you were sure of your cook, your doctor, and your chemist (p. 30). The German bishops had not, like the French, asked per mission to meet among themselves, but their place of meeting had been cared for. Monsignor Nardi, a slashing writer, and a conspicuous member of the Curia, spared no pains to secure them for his own house. Cardinal Hohenlohe offered his for the purpose, but he scarcely received a civU answer. Even German bishops said as much as that they should compromise themselves by being identified with him. They began to feel their position very dehcate. As they were assembled on December 22, with Cardinal Schwarzenberg in the chair, they were joined for the first time by three favourites of the Curia — Senestrey, Martin, and Leonrod. But when Senestrey found that they were discussing the propriety of petitioning the Pope for a relaxation of the Rules, he remembered that business required his presence elsewhere. We may be ready to smile at men, holding professedly the position of members of a Council, who durst not rise in their places and insist on having liberty to propose what their consciences dictated ; and who, when refused that liberty, instead of declining to take part in the mock Council, went into a caucus, and drew up a petition to the autocrat who had snatched away their rights. But their position was very difficult. If they attempted in their places to speak on the matter, the fatal sentence feU upon them that what the Holy Father had decreed could not be discussed. What then could they do but decline to take part in the CouncU ? This would be coming into direct coUision with the Pope. The moral education of their lives had aimed at fixing in their own minds, and they, in their action upon others, had aimed at fixing in their minds, one conviction — that the crime exceeding and comprehending aU others was to break with the Pope. They were so placed as to have no alternative but either " disobedience " or the surrender of their individual and coUective rights. They seem, indeed, to have thought that it was rather a spirited proceeding to send in a petition. UNFAVOURABLE OPINIONS OF PRELATES 347 Archbishop Haynald of Hungary proposed that they should request the Pope to divide the Fathers into eight national groups. This was suggested with some idea of counter balancing the fictitious majority made up by titular bishops and vicars apostolic. Had one nation been aUowed to balance another, the effect no doubt would have been considerable ; but how these venerable men could imagine that this scheme had any chance with the Pope, we cannot tell. The bishops in partibus, and the missionary bishops, being mostly Italians, would have been weU nigh lost in such an arrangement. The Curia well knew that it had been tried at Constance, and was not to be caught. What Friedrich heard of the opinions of the prelates as to the Draft Decrees, was unfavourable. Cardinal Rauscher was reported to have said that he would allow the paper to be read in his seminaries as the work of a student, but that to propose it to a German Council was too bad (p. 35). Many of the bishops said that its condemnations were untimely, and that it was unworthy of the dignity of a General Council. It was said to be the work of the Jesuit Fathers Schrader and Franzelin ; but instead of the latter, Kleutgen was often named. The Dominicans spoke slightingly of it. The Bishop of Ascoli, a Carmelite, said he had only patience to get through half of it, and then he threw it away. Strossmayer said to Friedrich, Why must the CouncU at this time of day pronounce condemnations as to squabbles heard of only in the schools, and worn out even there ? (p. 37). Kagerer told Friedrich that the bishops had agreed not to tell their theologians what passed at their private meetings ; on which Friedrich remarks that the bishops were right, for the chaplains and secretaries by whom they were served could not be properly described as theologians. He then gave a sigh for Hefele. MeanwhUe, he said, it was hard to listen to the talk of men, like Kagerer, who had come up without preparation, who were not fur nished with books, and who drove a trade in theology by guess work. Monsignor Nardi's hospitality to the German bishops had 348 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE not a smooth course. After having met at his house for the greater part of December, when they alighted one night in the Piazza CampiteUi, they found the servant of Cardinal Schwarzenberg posted there to send them back again. The Cardinal had received from Nardi a request to be relieved of their further presence, giving so short notice that there was no means of meeting the case but that of setting the servant to turn the bishops away from the door. Thenceforth they found a German host, Cardinal Rauscher.1 The General Congregation of December 20, after learning the names chosen for the Permanent Committee on Faith, had been occupied with the election of the Permanent Committee on Discipline ; but as the Acta contain no records of any transactions of the Congregations, beyond the bare lists of the committees elected by them, the strictly official means of ascertaining what passed are aU but nil. The Acta Sanctae Sedis may be fairly considered as official in a looser sense ; and it is strange how the brief but clear occasional notes of particulars which they contain, almost invariably confirm the profane writers in statements denied, or apparently denied, at the time by faithful ones. Deputations, including among others Strossmayer, went hither and thither in search of a haU to meet in. Quirinus thought that the one in the Vatican by the Sistine Chapel would not be of good omen, on account of the picture of St. Bartholomew's massacre. Had any real wish existed to find a place in which seven hundred gentlemen might sit and speak, it could easily have been done ; but the wholesome exhalations from the tomb of St. Peter would not have been so potent anywhere else, even in Rome, as in the Vatican. One-third of the space in the hall was now curtained off. The debates were to open on December 28, that is, after twenty days had been lost. News of the death of Cardinal Reisach destroyed the hope that his influence might prevent the Germans from standing with the Opposition. The preparations for a code regulating civU and ecclesiastical relations, on which he had spent years, 1 Tagebuch, 47. HOPES FOR CHURCH DOMINANCE 349 were not to see the light. It had already been resolved not to present to the Council the Drafts prepared by his Commission on Ecclesiastico-Political Affairs. Cecconi (p. 266) thinks that probably the absence of the Cardinal " contributed to the shipwreck " of his proposals. The subject was " thorny " ; and again, it was not decorous to make inoperative laws, or expedient to make combative ones. It would seem that the supreme cause of the shipwreck was the practical consideration that nowadays civU governments, " which form an essential element in such matters," oppose ecclesiastical laws, instead of taking charge of their execution. The official historian, however, is of opinion that the faUure of this first attempt to indite a code of ecclesiastico-political law is not final. A time, he thinks, may come when it can be renewed, with hope of success — a declaration fuU of instruction as to the future. The time for renewing the attempt to prepare such a code wUl, according to the Archbishop of Florence, arrive when this rapid and ceaseless movement, political and social, going on under our eyes, and making us daily spectators of great and often of unlooked-for events, shaU have reached its ultimate period, to which wiU certainly succeed (unless the last days succeed) an enthely new era in the history of the human species. When that day comes, I know not what portion of the old institutions wiU remain standing ; but sure I am that one of them wiU have survived, though peradventure externally bruised and lacerated. She alone wiU be mistress of the field that day, and the princes (if indeed the sound of that name will still be heard), but certainly the nations, having then, after long and cruel ex perience, made up their minds that out of her there is no well- being, either in this life or beyond the tomb, wfll demand from her the laws of tranquil repose, together with the earnest of eternal happiness (p. 301). This language is the more significant as having been written since the war in 1870, and even since the outbreak in Germany of imperial resistance to the movement for priestly domination. With regard to princes, it seems to breathe the threat which was screeched out by the Jesuit organs in 1869 and 1870, that if they were not to sink in the coming struggle, they must make peace with the Church. 350 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE As to the nations and the laws of the Church, it adroitly represents the nations, not as submitting to receive the law at her dictation, but as demanding from her the laws which give repose. The ever-recurring alternative of submission or dis turbance, if not destruction, is smoothly but gravely put. StUl, the historian seems as if he wrote thus rather by official duty than by personal impulse. But, like aU the " inspired " writers, he takes it for granted that the Church holds the " re pose " of nations in her power. Cardinals count on the effect of thorns planted in the pUlows of statesmen. They know how to teach principles that form a people within the nation ready to obey a foreign word of command, and they know how and when to give the word. They always — so say men in Italy — know how to find an Ahithophel, and how a Dehlah ! Fears were often expressed lest an attempt should be made on December 28 to carry Papal infaUibUity by acclamation. The bishops, however, seem to have had backbone enough to determine upon a formal protest should this occur. Friedrich teUs how those dignitaries who make little of denouncing the laws of their respective countries were very anxious in Rome to find some mode of giving expression to theh com plaints and desires without printing, which in the Model State they durst not do. He also states that on the day before the opening of the discussion the Pope was greatly depressed. It may have been a diplomatic depression. What bishop could be so heartless as to make speeches that would weigh on the spirit of the Holy Father, and in fact to caU in question Draft Decrees prepared by his authority and proposed in his name ? What bishop, by obstructing their adoption, could occasion a risk that the day fixed by Decree for the second session should arrive without any Decree being ready ? One of Friedrich's statements, which, before Cecconi published, seemed the most improbable of all, was that Cardinal BUio, the President of the Preparatory Commission on Dogma, had reckoned on the Draft being carried with scarcely any discussion. Much as we knew of the displacement of the idea of conviction by that FIRST VATICAN DECREE 351 of submission, this statement seemed too monstrous. But the Archbishop of Florence appears unconscious of anything strange in the case. If Itahan novelists and journalists, with whom the indifference of the national mind to religion is a favourite idea, had combined to give an iUustration of that indifference, they could hardly have invented anything so expressive. A Cardinal taking it for granted that seven hundred bishops could hastily adopt for ever as doctrine binding upon themselves, their successors, and their Churches, a considerable work, every single phrase of which any serious man would weigh before he accepted it for his own creed, but would weigh ten times more carefuUy before he imposed it upon others — before he took it upon his soul to curse aU who did not accept it, and to declare them cut off from the king dom of God ! Yet it is plain that not only Bilio, but the Curia generaUy, expected the passing of the Draft as almost a matter of course. In their minds the idea of submission to the Papal authority had first displaced, and then completely replaced, the idea of religious conviction. The first Vatican Decree passed after the Council had been declared open, fixed the feast of Epiphany (January 6) as the day of the second session, in the expectation that this Draft, or a portion of it, would by that time have been adopted. But, like the first Vatican appointment, the first Vatican Decree had been not ratified in heaven. The Civiltd said (VII. ix. 227), " As the discussion on the Draft proposed is not terminated, no Decrees wiU be published in the second session." The Acta Sanctae Sedis curtly wrote, " No Decree was published because none was ready." 1 Meantime the relative attitudes of the Council and of the Catholic governments had become more clearly defined. FoUowing France, and rejecting the view of Bavaria and Portugal, the governments had determined not to interfere. Portugal had sent to her minister his credentials as ambassador to the Council, but finding that he should be alone, Count Lavradio did not present them. France, which for the last ten 1 V. 323 352 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE years had been abused by the Papal organs, was now loudly praised. Even M. Veuillot said that she was more liberal and more Christian than the other nations, for her bayonets were at Civita Vecchia to restrain the violence of the Italians, and God would not forget it to her. True, French statesmen every now and then did show some apprehension as to what might come to pass if every child in France should learn in his catechism that the Pope was infaUible, and if most of them should grow up under teachers who would gently show how the Modern State rebeUed against the divine constitution of the world as implied in that fundamental truth, for the govern ment of the nations. It was even said that Darboy plainly declared that should infaUibUity be proclaimed, the French troops would no longer remain in the Papal States. However that might have been, aU that feU from the inspired pens was pervaded with quiet reliance on France. It seemed as if the writers believed that, just then, events depended more on one Spanish lady, in the Tuileries, than on all the Frenchmen in Paris and the departments. It cannot be said that the compliance with the wishes of the Curia shown by pohticians, was repaid by a milder atti tude. The new BuU, technicaUy called Apostolicae Sedis, popularly caUed the new In Coena Domini, was menacing. The grave Civiltd (VII. ix. 134) said — Whom would the people obey ? God and the Church, or the State ? . . . As it is evident that the Church assembled in Council can only repeat, and that more strongly than ever, that as between God and men, as between the Church and the State, obedience is to be rendered to God and the Church instead of to man and the State, and as it is evident that in Catholic and civilized countries, in spite of all the efforts of sects, respect for the Church endures, and increases, whfle all respect for States and governments dimin ishes, it is clear that the Liberals, who are dominant almost everywhere, tremble at the Council, which is bound to proclaim more loudly than ever, We must obey God rather than men. Even the little review at the Villa Borghese set M. VeuiUot reflecting on the restoration of that " Christian order " which FALL OF ANCIENT ARISTOCRACY 353 consists in the due submission of the natural to the super natural order — If we only think that the Council has to re-establish the Chris tian order without restoring the ancient aristocracy, irremediably faUen, and has to replace the social laws in a position where pro perty and liberty shall be freed from the grasp of democracy, which is no more than an administrative aristocracy, we shall con clude that the task is not a trifle, and that the seed to be sown is not of a kind to ripen in a day. In most Papal countries, indeed, the ancient aristocracy has fallen, and, much as priests like titles and stars in their train, they like broad acres still better, and legislative power even better stiU. Even when barons held lands in fief under prince-bishops and abbots, they were frequently tempted to insubordination. And in the Model State, the career open to a lord was as nearly as possible that which in our chaotic state is open to a lady. So, the aristocracy were not to be restored. But in the new Christian order both freedom and property were to be taken out of the hands of the democracy. This had been weU done in the states of the Church, and partly done elsewhere, in the middle ages. In the formula, " The Pope and the People," people does not, we repeat, mean democracy, but subject populace, with a ruling priesthood and nobody to come between priest and mob. Matters would be greatly simplified if both an aristocracy and an adminis trative democracy were removed out of the way. But, true to the far-aiming plans of the school, M. VeuiUot was thinking of the seed-time, knowing that the harvest was as yet far off. When the prize is no less than the supremacy of the world, a year may weU be counted for a day. M. VeuUlot, aUuding to those profane creatures the corre spondents of worldly newspapers, said he had had to do with government spies, but Press spies made him respect the former. The Press spies detested respectable men, seeming to think that they spoUed the profession, and prevented it from enjoying all the hatred and contempt it merited (i. 33). M, VeuiUot cpuld afford to assume this attitude. The Univers 23 354 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE was sanctified by the Pope's blessing, and certified by his brief. This high-caste scribe had not, however, said a word about the device by which the election of committees had been carried, though he gloried in the choice of men. He had not mentioned the electoral tickets, nor aUuded to the prohibition of coUective meetings of the French bishops, nor to the petition sent in by some of their number for a few morsels of liberty. He had, however, told the faithful that none of the bishops had any desire to be put on the com mittees, and that a prelate from South America, on finding himself elected, wept and said, " What do you mean ? I am not fit. I know nothing." Writing on January 20, after the' division of parties had become clearly defined, M. VeuiUot said that should an Opposition group be formed, as some feared would be the case, it would only be small, and would be rather outside of the Council than in it. " Outside," said a bishop to me yesterday, " there is some room for the spirit of man ; inside there wiU be no room for anything but the Spirit of God ; and though unanimity is by no means necessary, it wiU nevertheless seldom faU." It was, at this time, still hoped that the " pontifical secret " would leave no chink by which the tenor of the debates could leak out. " How," exclaims M. Veuillot, " wUl this assembly be able to distribute its incalculable labours, and carry them to an end ? Immense questions arise on aU sides. It is the human species that has to be set in march. Nature feels its infirmity." StiU, it wiU prove, he asserts, that the Council can more easily make decrees for centuries, than modern governments can make constitutions to last a few months. An address to the Holy Father, from the Society of Catholic Itahan youth having its headquarters in Bologna, declared that in answer to the infernal fury of the enemies of the sacred CouncU, they protested their resolution to obey its Decrees as the holy gospel, as the decrees of God Himself, and to defend its disciplinary acts as the acts of God Himself. In conclusion, they caU the Pope, among other titles, the living Peter, the infaUible mouth of the Church and of Christ Him- GIVING THE LIE 355 self, the Vicar of God, " whose word for us and the Catholic universe is the truth of God which endureth for ever." -*¦ A strong force of equally weU-trained youths in every country would do something to give substance to the dream of uni versal empire, by a Crusade of St. Peter. ¦* To say that the Civiltd and the Unitd Cattolica contradicted nearly all the facts reported by the journals of Europe, would be a tame statement of the case. They not only gave the lie, but did so with all sorts of aggravating epithets. The Italian papers were most belied, because they, feeling no re spect for the men of the Curia, did not care to put on any, but tore off false covers relentlessly, and even with mockery. According to an ordinary Italian saying, respect for the Curia begins outside the walls of Rome, and increases in proportion to distance. Still, the French, German, and English papers, though more respectful — the last, in comparison, deferential — were denounced as lying and lying again. This went smoothly tiU the lie-givers descended to particulars. Even then it answered, to some extent, tiU time brought facts to the test. Now, it is sad to look at these contradictions, and compare them with documents registered in the same pages, or with facts which even there are no longer disputed. Any one who wants a lesson in the art of giving the lie may go to an article in the Civiltd (VII. ix. p. 327), and succeeding ones. After studying them an Englishman would be more charitable to Romans when they say that if the Jesuits contradict a thing well, they begin to think it must be true. But he would discover that, under an apparent contradiction, there is often preserved a possibility of saying that there was no real one. A statement has been made containing one main fact, which was perfectly true, but with two or three accidental appendages, some one of which was not true, and the whole is treated as false. For instance, the whole tale of Nardi dismissing the German prelates is to appearance ridiculed, because one journal says that Nardi had made a secret door, at which he played the eavesdropper. Of course it was an 1 Civiltd, VII. ix. 238. 356 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Italian journal — La Nazione — which thought that a probable action for a monsignore of the Curia. The Nu ova Antologia, a review of high standing in Italy, published articles on the Council, which formed the basis of Vitelleschi's book. The Civiltd assigned them to Salvatore de Renzi, spoke of them as being not more inaccurate than others, and after general charges came to particulars. The author's " want of reflection " appeared in his supposing that though abbots and generals of orders both had seats, only the former had votes. Moreover, he had said that in the sessions the Fathers always wore the read pluvial and mitre ; whereas in the first two sessions they had worn the white ones, and the statement as to the mitre was falsissimo, as false as could be, for in Rome, and in the presence of the Pope, they always wore one of white silk or cloth. When all Catholics were in serious excitement, when they knew that hands were laid on their creed to alter it for them and their children, it was such matters as the above which weighed upon the minds of the Jesuits, and justified outcry against men who strove to get and give some little information. The first article of professed inteUigence in the Civiltd after the Council had reaUy got to work, spoke of giving only the external news, which was what aU the " good Press " professed to give. What it gave was indeed external. A person turning to these official pages in hope of learning what he would have to believe by-and-by, found paragraphs about " clothes " (VII. ix. 99). " We have told our readers of the vestments worn by the Fathers in the public session. They wfll be pleased to have a translation of the notice appointing the ceremony to be observed in the Congregations" — the cere mony meaning the ceremonial garments. The men who were undertaking to change for the priests and people the conditions of their membership in the Church, to revolutionize, their relations with their neighbours and even with their nations, were yet persuaded that whfle aU this was going on, priests and people must be thinking of how the gowns of the Fates were dyed, and not of what threads they were spinning. So, NOBLE LAMORICIERE 357 with conscientious exactness, the faithful were informed that the Most Reverend and Most Eminent Lords the Cardinals would wear the red and violet mozzetta and mantelletta over the rochet ; and the Most Reverend Patriarchs the violet mozzetta and rochet, etc., etc., etc. A touching incident of private life came to soften the feelings of the Fathers on the eve of the struggle. The son of De Maistre, the champion of the pen, and the daughter of Lamoriciere, the champion of the sword, had, four months previously, been married. " Two such fair names," exclaims M. VeuiUot — yes, two stately figures, bending in vain to stay a falling oak. The young wife was smitten with death, and the widow of the hero could only reach Rome in time to close her daughter's eyes. The whole city united in sorrow ing over the mingled tears of the houses of De Maistre and Lamoriciere. Noble Lamoriciere ! During the four dreadful days of June, 1848, in Paris, his chivalrous sword formed a shield behind which thousands sat in safety. None who were of the number, as we were, can ever without gratitude think of him, or of the stainless Cavaignac. CHAPTER IV First open Collisions of Opinion — Pending Debate — Fear of an Acclam ation — Rauscher opens — Kenrick — Tizzani — General discontent with the Draft — Vacant Hats — Speaking by Rank — Strossmayer — No permission to read the Reports, even of their own Speeches — Conflicting Views — Petitions to Pope from Bishops — Homage of Science— Theism THE moment had come at last when it was to be seen whether the parliamentary proceedings of a discussion suspended in the Catholic society for three hundred years, was actuaUy to be revived ; or whether the bishops, justifying the confidence in their gravity and wisdom which the Curia would fain have cherished, would now set the world an example of magnifying authority, by adopting the all- comprehensive dogma of Papal infallibility by acclamation, without running the risk of any debate. That once done, minor points would settle themselves, whether in the Council or out of it. The fears of a scheme to organize an acclama tion were strong, not to say feverish. Cardinal Schwarzen berg wrote, " In case a demonstration is attempted for an acclamation, a formal counter demonstration is already provided for." J Before the commencement of the sitting, Cardinal De Luca, now Senior President, gave an assurance that no acclamation would be attempted ; adding, however, that he could only give the pledge for that one sitting. Stross mayer, relating this fact the next day, in the house of Cardinal Hohenlohe, added that, should it be attempted hereafter, the bishops of the minority would put in a protest, in the name of Christ, of the Church, of their rights, of their people, and of sound reason.2 *¦ Tagebuch, p. 44. ** Tagebuch, p. 45. 358 RAUSCHER OPENS THE DEBATE 359 Lord Acton's picture of the scene before the sitting is more distinct than that of the other writers. It is Darboy whom he describes as demanding an assurance that there would be no acclamation. When the promise for the first sitting was coupled with a statement that there could be no guarantee for the future, he said a hundred bishops were resolved, in case that proceeding was resorted to, that they would leave Rome, and " carry the CouncU away in their shoes." 1 The uncertainty which had hung over everything but dress was so great that some prelates had prepared their votes, thinking that, owing to the determination to have some Decree ready for promulgation at Epiphany, a division would be pressed on that day.2 In print, the tribune, or desk, prepared for the CouncU, is a laudable specimen of Roman art. To look at, it is what we must call a common-place pulpit. It was carried from place to place — more than one writer says, carried aU round the haU — to try to find a spot in which it would be possible for a speaker to be heard. When the desk was at last fixed, two priests, as reporters, took their place in front of it.3 Cardinal Rauscher, Archbishop of Vienna, was the first who ascended. Behind him he saw his own achievement — that Concordat by which he had secured for Rome the abolition in Austria of the Josephine Laws. Before him lay the Draft of Decrees, for the most part, as it was beheved, the handiwork of Schrader, whom he had himself installed as a professor in the University of Vienna, and who was doubtless a fit man to make it what it was — a dogmatic reflection of the earliest portions of the SyUabus. The sagacity of Rauscher told him that the success of these proposed Decrees would be the doom of the Concordat. Hence, he rose, not to support the theology of his nominee, but to save his own diplomatic achievement. So the discussion opened with a briUiant address, as Friedrich calls it, delivered in the round, rough Latin pronun ciation of the Germans. Darboy soon left the haU, saying that it was undignified to sit professedly listening to speeches 1 Acton, p. 72,. 2 Tagebuch, p. 44. 3 Acta Sancta Sedis, v. 316, 360 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE which one could not make out. What with the mocking of the echoes and what with the pronunciation foreign to all but Germans, none could understand but the few in whose favour combined all the advantages of keen ears, a good position, and some familiarity with German intonation. All that we know of the discourse of Cardinal Rauscher has become known in spite of the sUence of every official organ ; and it amounts to no more than the fact that he opposed the Draft Decrees with firmness and abUity. The strict Church regime assured by his Concordat to Austria had not been followed by the halcyon days which such a regime was said to guarantee. Loud complaints were made that the moral statistics of Vienna, previously very bad, had, under the new law of marriage, become worse. However that might be, there was no doubt that under the Concordat Austria had undergone both Solferino and Sadowa. If, after aU this, new fetters were to be forged, Rauscher was well aware that the chain would snap. After Cardinals, Archbishops ! So the Irish-Latin of Arch bishop Kenrick, of St. Louis, succeeded to the German-Latin of Rauscher. The voice from the Mississippi joined that from the Danube in making light of the theological performance of Rome. The next who foUowed was Tizzani, nominally Arch bishop of Nisibis, really Chaplain-General of the Papal army. A blind old man, he did not mount the desk, but, speaking from his place, he was the first who gave forth the Latin in the clear, full pronunciation, which must be nearer to the natural one than the others. He said that the Draft was words, words, and nothing but words. Three other Italians followed on the same side. It was stUl the turn of the Archbishops ; and Connolly, of Halifax, Nova Scotia, closed the discussion of the day. There are two versions of his concluding innuendo. One is, that the Draft was to be honourably interred ; and the other, that it was not to be amended but erased. Cum honore esse sepeliendum . . . non esse reformandum censeo sed delendum. Fourteen names had been entered, but when seven had spoken, it was one o'clock, and the weary work of attempt- RESERVE OF THE "GOOD PRESS" 361. ing to hear was brought to an end. The old men had been already four hours in the hall. The Giomale di Roma and the Civiltd gave the names of the speakers, but not a syllable of information as to what they said. The same course was taken by all the " good Press." It professed to give information only of the exterior of the Council. Even the Acta Sancta Sedis, in its Latin veU, does not utter a hint of what view any speaker took. It does, indeed, say that no one replied to observations for, against, or beside the proposals of the Decree, thus confirming the common remark that there was no real debate.1 Among all the charges of lying, shameless lying, lurid lying, and so on, brought against the lay Press, we do not remember any attempt to contradict the particulars circulated as to this day's pro ceedings, unless indeed it be Cardinal Manning's general treatment of all that had been said respecting an intention to get up an acclamation, as ridiculous rumours. Cardinal BUio, as President of the Commission on Dogma, from which the Draft had emanated, would naturally be, as Friedrich says he was, downcast ; and we may well believe the same witness, that the Cardinals generally were disconcerted. On the other hand, Cardinal Schwarzenberg said, " It has gone exceUently " ; and Archbishop Scherr, of Munich, thought that it was as if one had heard " the rushing of the wings of the Holy Ghost " — one of the expressions in which that sacred name was often lightly taken during the CouncU, and which, from hints found elsewhere, seems to have fallen on this occasion also from other lips. Strossmayer was by no means so elated, knowing that the Curia was in a position to hold its own. This discussion raised the spirits of the minority, and filled them for a whUe with illusory hopes. It seemed as if the one hberty left, that of making Latin speeches, might turn to great account. Meanwhile, according to Lord Acton, specula tion ran on the possible effects of fifteen vacant hats, which were supposed to have the power of doing wonders, and which 1 Vol. v. p. 316, 362 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE the genuine Romans would certainly expect to turn episcopal heads in whatever direction they might happen to be held. Darboy said, " I have not a cold in the head ; I do not want a hat." Quirinus points out the bearing of such multiplication of anathemas as was aimed at in the Draft on the ascendancy of the Jesuits. These anathemas would supply abundant matter for accusation, and so enable the Jesuits to keep men belonging to other orders in constant fear of being charged with heresy. This would tend to make other theologians dependent upon their order. He adds, moreover, that if the Draft Decrees should be passed, scarcely any professors of Old Testament exegesis would escape the charge of heresy. Two days later the debate was resumed. The archbishops were still in possession ; but after one more of them had spoken came the turn of the bishops. Rank carried it against the rule that in council all are equal. Athanasius the deacon, and Constantine the layman, were both outside the door. And outside the door were also the " presbyters " who alone at Nicsea represented Rome. Unity had come to mean a sharp sepa ration of the Church into the Teaching Church and the Learn ing Church. The Teaching Church consisted of the Pope and bishops ; the Learning Church consisted of priests and people. Those who desired to speak entered their names at least one day beforehand ; and of those so entered Cardinals spoke first, Patriarchs next, then Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, and Generals, according to their grade. The first bishop who rose was Strossmayer. As he had before attempted to speak upon the Rules, so did he now attack the heading of the Decree, namely, the formula " Pius IX., with the approbation of the Council," instead of the Trident ine formula, " This Sacred. Council decrees." He was called to order by Cardinal De Luca. That point, he ruled, was not to be discussed, for it had been settled in the Rules of Procedure, and also in the form used in the opening session. No one supported Strossmayer in his objection, and, in point of form, the Presi dent was doubtless right. The bishops had allowed their birth- STROSSMAYER'S GREAT SPEECH 363 right to be taken away, and it was now too late to reclaim it. True, if they had been united, they might have alleged that the taking of it away had been done both violently and stealthily ; but stUl, it had been done before their eyes. Strossmayer's speech gave to modern Rome a sensation strange to her, though familiar to ancient Rome — the feeling caused by the echoes of impassioned reasoning in favour of free dom. And this time it was freedom commended by the voice of a bishop! The degree of freedom advocated was, indeed, only such as anywhere else would have been a minimum. The reports given of the eloquence of the speaker were exciting, and it would appear that even those of opponents were often laudatory. Lord Acton gives the following passage — What do we gain by condemning what has been already con demned ? What end is promoted by proscribing errors which we know to have been already proscribed ? The false doctrines of sophists have vanished like ashes before the wind. They have corrupted many, I confess, and infected the spirit of the age. But can we beheve that the contagion of corruption would not have taken effect had errors of this sort been smitten down with anathema, by Decree ? We have no means given to us beyond cries and prayers to God, whereby to defend and conserve the Catholic religion, but those of Cathohc science in complete agreement with the faith. The heretics assiduously cultivate science unfriendly to the faith, and therefore true science friendly to it should be cultivated among Catholics, and advanced by every effort. Let us stop the mouth of opponents, who cease not falsely to impute to us that the Cathohc Church represses science, and restrains aU free thought, so that within her bounds neither science nor any liberty of intellect can flourish or exist. Further, it has to be shown, and that both by words and deeds, that in the Catholic Church there exist true liberty for the nations, true progress, true hght, and true pros perity.1 This proposal to fight thought only with thought, and to aUow institutions to be tested by their fruits, was well fitted for any soil where the Bible was the statute-book, but was untenable ground in Rome. The excitement was great. Ketteler embraced Strossmayer as he came down. Senestrey, icton, pp. 74, 75, both in German and Latin. 364. THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE on the other hand, stated that he had said things for which he must have been called to order in any assembly. Dinkle said he had spoken on his own account, and showed no inclination to share risks with him. The first French prelate who came to the desk was Ginoulhiac, of Grenoble, who also spoke against the Draft. What he then said we know not. What he had just previously published under his own hand we do know. Resisting the idea of an acclamation, he said — To insist upon dispensing with previous examination, because of the immense importance of the question, or because the subject of the question was that which in the Church is greatest, would be not merely to depart from the practice of all ages, but it would also be to commit a most serious error, and to awaken in all grave minds just suspicions of the decision which might be arrived at. In past times nothing was so feared as the appearance of not devoting to important decisions sufficient time, and of not giving sufficient satisfaction even to the minds of the prejudiced (p. 43). Speaking of the liberty essential to a real Council, he had said (p. 46) — Little does it matter whether the hberty of deliberation and of vote be violated in one way or another, whether by fear or by guile, whether the violence exerted is physical or moral ; so soon as liberty is gravely hampered, the Church no longer recognizes herself as truly represented. Friedrich tells how Strossmayer, the day before, had said that he would write out his speech and send it in ; for the reporters were so unskilful that their manuscripts were of little use. But we do not see how he could do more than guess what their reports were. At the same time (it was in the house of Car dinal Hohenlohe), he said that now, since he had been in Rome, he could understand how both the Reformation and the Greek Schism had originated. It was in his view a real crime for the Pope to claim to be the successor of Christ instead of the successor of Peter ; the way in which bishops were driven was, he added, inconceivable, when one remembered that it was they that kept up the dignity of the Pope, and prepared the minds of the people to acknowledge it. INDIFFERENCE OF ITALIANS 3°5 A prelate of different views was he to whom Friedrich had said that, in order to understand the events of the Council, one must read the Civiltd, further adding that had he been Prince Hohenlohe in Bavaria, he would have answered the Civiltd by expelling the Jesuits from Regensburg. " They are innocent people," said the Bishop. " Individually," replied the Pro fessor, " they may be innocent people, but they represent an order which propagates doctrine dangerous to the State." He tells also how it was found that the French, German, Austro- Hungarian, and American bishops had an International Com mittee of three ; but that the Pope, regarding this as savouring of Nationalism, and of a revolutionary spirit, forbade it. Lord Acton (p. 52) mentions another prohibition scarcely less signi ficant, namely, that the printed Rules of Procedure of the Council of Trent were, with the utmost strictness, withheld from the members of the Vatican Council. These rules, and the real minutes of that CouncU, had at that time never been published, and only saw the light in 1874, by the private efforts of Theiner. Of course, the Decrees and Canons had long been before the world. Among the many denials we do not re member any attempt to deny this specific aUegation. An argu ment could be easily constructed, on the principle now accepted, to prove that it was no interference with liberty to deprive the bishops of the physical possibility of informing themselves of the extent of rights which they had inherited from their prede cessors at the latest General Council. Lord Acton says that one effect of the determination to keep the discussions secret was that it led the bishops to express themselves more strongly than they would have done had they expected their words to be read at home and conned over by Protestants. At the same time, much leaked out. AU agree that the inhabitants of Rome took httle interest in the dis cussions, whUe, in the religious aspect of the question, the Italians generally took scarcely any ; and this indifference reacted on the interest they might have taken in its political aspects. They committed the error of despising their enemy. Knowing the men and their communications, they aUowed 366 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE their own estimate of the worth of priests to affect their calcu lation as to their influence. There is a well accredited story of Lord Acton going to Florence, full of the burning questions which were to affect the future of every Roman Catholic. Dining with a relation in the very centre of the political circle, and meeting several members of the Cabinet, he naturally expected to find them taking some interest in the cosmopolitan politics then under treatment by the Senate of Humanity, the Supreme Legislature of the Human Species. But the Italians were buried in some passing question of grist, or the like, and had no ear for the principles which were to shape the future of nations. They saw little in the proceedings more than that the Pundits of an expiring caste were passing resolutions to adjourn the nineteenth century and to conserve the eleventh. German and English Catholics were not capable of thus treating principles as husks. Whether Fallibilists or InfaUi- bilists, they knew that the destiny of that Society, which both agreed to call " The Church," was now at stake, and that, at least, the repose of nations, if not their destiny, was also impli cated. The Liberal Catholics, holding that the attempt to restore a theocracy would only lead to wars, and that humanity would avenge itself on the Papacy for again fomenting blood shed, hoped that somehow God would save the Church from the blindness of the Curia. The Catholics, on the other hand, equally aiming at ultimate peace, and even regaling their imaginations with a vision of millennial repose, so soon as aU nations should have accepted the Vicegerent of God as the representative of Christ Himself, were in the meantime pro foundly convinced that the only way to obtain that repose was through the very conflict from which their faint-hearted, brethren shrank. The InfaUibilists could not harbour the idea bf the Church faUing in the struggle. That was to them like supposing that the gates of heU should prevaU. To the Liberal Cathohcs the Jesuits were conspiring against humanity and aU its franchises. To the Jesuits, on the other hand, the Liberal Catholics seemed PETITION OF BISHOPS 367 to be risking the loss of such an opportunity as might never recur, of putting the Church in a position to constrain govern ments to accept the principles by which alone nations could be saved. Therefore did they look upon any shrinking from the struggle as indicating worldly fear rather than foreseeing care for the Church. If Liberal Catholics looked upon the Jesuits as conspiring against humanity, the Jesuits looked upon the Liberal Catholics as agitators against divine authority. No wonder that in such a state of feeling, what Lord Acton de scribes took place, " The word-war of the hall was always fought over and over again outside, with the addition of anecdotes, epigrams, and inventions." It was on Sunday, January 2, that two petitions were sent in to the Pope . The first was signed by forty-three prelates, headed by Cardinals Schwarzenberg and Rauscher, and the Primate of Hungary.1 This was no Bill of Rights, not containing even a chaUenge of that exercise of prerogative which it sought partiaUy to relax. The privileges for which two princes and forty-one magnates petitioned, " prostrate at thy feet," were — (1) That the Fathers might be distributed into, say, six groups, in which Draft Decrees could be considered in the principal living languages before being brought on for discussion in Latin, in the General Congregation. (2) That speeches delivered in the General Congregation might be printed for the exclusive use of the members of the Council, and under the same bond of secrecy as that under which the Draft Decrees were communicated to them. (3) That the Draft Decrees on faith and discipline might all as soon as possible be laid in a connected form before the Fathers, and should not any longer be presented, as hitherto, piecemeal. (4) That the Fathers, after having in the vernacular meetings considered the Draft Decrees, might be allowed to send a couple of delegates from each group to the committee to represent their views. (5) That the Fathers might be allowed to print, in addition to speeches dehvered in the General Congregation, writings in which questions Could be treated more thoroughly ; these however to be printed subject to the same bond of secrecy as the Draft Decrees. (6) "Prostrate at thy feet, -we crave the apostolic benediction for our-r selves and the faithful committed to us." "* Documenta, i. 247. 368 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE We do not know that even the last of the six things here prayed for was granted, for the petition never received an answer. These dignitaries clearly state to their royal master the grounds on which they petitioned for some of the elementary rights of human creatures. They say that Decrees cannot be reaUy sifted by speaking a dead language in an assembly of seven hundred persons from all parts of the world, unless, first, in companies speaking living languages, the Fathers have had the opportunity of examining their contents. And further, that however well acquainted with Latin all might be, there were many prelates who did not speak it. Moreover, the petitioners, admitting that the Council HaU was admirable as being so near the tomb of St. Peter, state that in the first General Congregation, though some of the speakers had ex- ceUent voices, not one of them could make himself heard by aU. Even since changes had been effected, the greater part of the members could not hear all the speakers. Another of their points is this : Although men weU worthy of confidence — viri fide dignissimi — had assured them that the reports of the speeches should be distributed to the Fathers in print, so that they might read what they had not been able to hear, " in this hope we have been disappointed." They appeal thus to their master, " Most Blessed Father, by thine excelling wisdom, wilt thou perceive that, as the Fathers can neither hear what is spoken, nor read it, proper consultation is not possible." *- They go on to urge that even if the dis cussions were held in a place where men with the weakest voices could be heard, it would still be desirable that the members should be in a position to look over what had been advanced in successive sittings. " Matters of weightiest moment," they add, " are being treated, and frequently the addition, omission, or change of a single word may adulterate the sense." If, say they, the Fathers had the opportunity of explaining their views in writing, they could lay many things before their feUow members which could not be brought into speeches. As to obtaining an understanding of the proposals, they urged that, 1 " Consultationem sicut decet haberi non posse," SECOND PETITION OF BISHOPS 369 in questions of doctrine, one thing so connects itself with another, and discipline is so much affected by doctrine, that they are not in any position to give a judgment on Draft Decrees, obviously forming but part of a scheme, while as yet other parts of it are kept from their knowledge. The relation between the unknown parts and the parts before them is an element in any judgment to be formed. The second petition, dated on the same Sunday,1 was signed by twenty-six prelates, including several of those who had signed the other, and a few additional ones, such as Kenrick of St. Louis. Cardinal Rauscher did not sign it, but Cardinal Schwarzenberg did. It set out by indirectly asserting more in principle than the other ; but it ended by asking less in prac tice. It seemed both to assume the right of proposition on the part of the prelates, and to imply that the taking of it away would deserve blame ; but it had not the courage to say that it had been taken away. Those are not wanting, say the peti tioners, who interpret the Rules as not recognizing the right of the Fathers to propose in the Council what they may think conducive to the public good, but as conceding it only excep- tionaUy and as a matter of grace. This may be a diplomatic way of indicating what the Rules said without confessing the fact that they did say it. But what they did say was too plain for any such finesse. The prayer of the petition is confined to two points : that some members of the Commission on Pro posals should be elected by the Committee, and that the authors of proposals should have access to the committees, and thus have some part in the treatment of the particular matter in which they were interested. These petitions say more than aU the assertions of the much contradicted Liberal Catholics about the want of freedom in the Council, and the want of the old spirit of bishops in the men who composed it. According to Friedberg, the first of the two was drawn up by Cardinal Rauscher (xii.). No name of an English, Irish, or Colonial prelate is attached to either petition. Nearly aU the names are those of Germans and Hungarians, 1 Documenta, ii. 383 ; also Friedberg, 410-14. 24 370 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE the only American one being that of Kenrick. His signature proves that the English-speaking group knew of the petitions, and the absence of aU other names belonging to that group would seem to indicate that members of the hierarchy from America, the British Isles, and our Colonies did not approve of bishops of their Church being entrusted with such extensive liberties as those for which their brethren petitioned. It is pretty certain that the American archbishop who signed this petition was not one of the prelates who told the Archbishop of Westminster that their Congress was not freer than the CouncU. Do senators and members of the House prostrate themselves at the feet of the President, petitioning for leave to meet in a place where they can hear and be heard, for leave to read reports of one another's speeches, and for leave to print memoranda — for leave even to elect a few members of a committee which decides what may and what may not be recommended to the President, to be proposed should he approve of it ? If they do not, we must only believe that America sends some citizens to Europe whose information as to the institutions of their country is not to be relied upon. Did Ginoulhiac, whose observations on the necessity of perfect freedom in a Council we have lately seen, consider legislators free who had to petition for such things ? Outside of the number of Cardinals resident in Rome, could even a Cardinal have been found beforehand to assert that liberty would not be gravely hampered, in any legislative assembly, whenever those who were caUed legislators were com pelled to indite petitions such as we have described ? We doubt if even a resident Cardinal would beforehand have dared in terms to deny that when, in a professed Council, liberty is gravely hampered, the Church does not recognize herself as represented. Now, it is easy to turn the point of aU such argu ments. Peter the InfaUible has only to say what rights James and John, Thomas and Paul shall enjoy, and in exercising them they possess all the freedom that God has been pleased to grant to them. The allusion in the petition to the ease with which the sense of a speech may be altered seems like a remark of Strossmayer, AN ANXIOUS OUTLOOK 371 quoted by Friedrich, that reports which were under no check but that of the Curia, and which even the speakers themselves were not allowed to inspect, could not be of any use. To this Friedrich adds, How much would the weight of the remark have been increased after an incident on July 9, " when the majority of the Council, and a committee of the Council, did not scruple formally to deceive the minority." The prayer of the petitioners for a sight of the whole scheme, as prepared, before they should be called upon to erect part of it into irreformable Decrees, was doubtless caused in part by the obvious relation between the Drafts already brought to light and the Syllabus. That compendium was not mentioned any more than it had been in many other public instruments, but the first Draft fitted to its first sections, just as the Encyclical which accompanied its issue had done to the whole document. Not withstanding its authority, its form made it of doubtful inter pretation, and these Decrees aimed at giving statutory form to its sentences. An Index Schematum, or List of Drafts, had come to light,1 which let the bishops see that what had hitherto been produced was but the first instalment of projected legisla tion covering all the ground occupied by the Syllabus. The first Draft treated only the philosophical and theological portion of the subjects ; but how were the principles enunciated to be applied, when the sections on Church and State should be arrived at ? The somewhat obscure teaching in the Draft on the elevation of man into the supernatural order, would, to mere politicians, look like theological nebulae, and, to mere theologians, like Ul-digested divinity. To men versed in the esoteric dialect, it was clearly intended to prepare the way for the doctrine of the elevation of man by baptism above the control of civil law, in all that affects his loyalty to the super natural order of the Church, whose Decrees had, by that regeneration, become his supreme statutes, her courts his supreme tribunals, and her priests his supreme magistrates. It was the dogmatizing of the principle which has already passed under our eye, that in baptism the subjects of the civU t Friedberg, xiv. ; Cecconi, 483-89 ; and Frond, vii. p. 263. 372 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE power are changed. Another principle now habituaUy under lies that one, namely, that man by redemption through Christ is raised above the government of the natural order, and placed under that of Christ, through His Vicar. The studious among the Liberal Catholics knew that under the name of Naturalism their principles were condemned. On the Monday following the day of the petitions, when the Congregation opened, after the prayers had been read, Cardinal De Luca rang the bell, and solemnly addressed the Fathers. Here, for once, we are able to give the very words that sounded in that hall of concealment, and this time not from an unofficial publication of official documents. It isthe Acta Sanctae Sedis that now actuaUy give us a speech. But it is a speech about the dead. The Cardinal is not so confident as to their happiness as were the writers of the Crusaders of St. Peter respecting that of those who fell in the Crusade. But he presents the two forms of the Papal worship of and for the dead, which differs from both the Chinese and the Brahminical. We see the two sides of it — the patronage of the living by the dead, and the patronage of the dead by the living. The Cardinal said — 1 Most Reverend Fathers, — It is known to you that since the opening of the (Ecumenical Vatican CouncU four Fathers have passed away by a death precious in the sight of the Lord, namely, the Most Eminent Charles Augustus de Reisach, Bishop of the Sabina and First President of the General Congregations ; the Most Eminent Francis Pentini, Deacon of St. Mary in Portico ; the Most Reverend Anthony Manastyrski, Bishop of Przemysl of the Latin rite ; and the Most Reverend Bernardin FrascoUa, Bishop of Foggia. The Christian virtues and the shining merits towards the holy Church of God and this Apostolic See, wherewith they were most largely adorned, inspire us with a sure and pleasant hope that their souls already enjoy rest eternal in the embrace of the Lord, and that in the presence of God they patronize our labours by their inter cession. Since, however, human frailty is such that they may even now stand in need of our suffrages, let us not neglect earnestly to commend them to the divine mercy. After this De Luca announced that in place of Reisach had been appointed Cardinal De Angelis. Thus one Who, just before DEATHS REPORTED 373 the Council opened, knew, or professed to know, so little that he told Cardinal Hohenlohe that nothing was to be done beyond condemning the principles of 1789, but who had served the Curia by the device of an election ticket, took the first seat, in which elevation the Opposition saw the reward of service in the elections. Next was announced the appointment by the Pope of Cardinal Bilio as President of the Committee on Faith, and that of Cardinal Caterini as President of the Committee on Discipline. The committees were not allowed to choose their own chairmen, nor yet was the Council allowed to name the chairmen of its committees.1 The next day, after Mass had been celebrated by Archbishop Manning, again had Cardinal De Luca to announce a death. It was that of the Bishop of Panama, a Dominican. The statement as to his sufferings here is plain. But as to his happiness hereafter, the full confidence felt in the case of the Crusaders, and the qualified confidence felt in the case of the two Cardinals, and of the two bishops whose deaths were reported with that of Cardinals, are both wanting. We have not here the " in peace " which in Rome, before priests learned to make a commerce of the dead, the poorest Christian wrote, it might be in the roughest scrawl, over the head of his wife or child ; nor have we here the life and immortality whereof the light makes the happy believer " rejoice for a brother deceased." Eduardo Vasques was not a Crusader, and was not a Cardinal, and had not even the happiness of being reported dead in company with a Cardinal. He was but a bishop, and, without doubt, in the pains of purgatory ; so De Luca just said that he had died last night, after great suffering, borne with exemplary patience. " Proper mortuary services wiU, as soon as possible, be performed. In the meantime, let us commend him to the mercy of God, both by the sacrifice of the Mass, and by other works of Christian charity." 2 The day before the second session, a procession moved to the Vatican, of seventeen carriages, carrying seventeen deputa tions, each bearing an address, with signatures, in a richly bound 1 Acta Sanctae Sedis, v.- 317-18. 2 Ibid. 319. 374 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE volume, for presentation to the Holy Father. These addresses conveyed that homage of science to the Pontiff the appeal for which has been already mentioned. The cultivators of science at the feet of Pius UX, and, The cultivators of science at the throne of the Holy Father, were the titles of articles in Catholic journals. The way was led by the deputation from the pon tifical academy of the Immaculate, which had initiated this movement. They were received in the Throne Room. A long address to the Pontiff was read. He sat, unmoved, to hear it. Then, " he lifted his eyes to heaven with an ineffable expression," and uttered a prayer that the sentiments conveyed in the address might spread among the multitudes of scientific men whose false science was ruining society. The Pope would quote Scripture, as he often tries to do ; and his text was Captivantes intellectum vestrum in obsequium fidei — Taking your intellect captive to the obedience of the faith. Probably he was think-. ing of 2 Corinthians x. 5, " Bringing every thought into cap tivity to the obedience of Christ," where the Vulgate translates, " Every thought (vorjfia), every intellect." He then assured them that pride was the sin of the day, and that it was all a repetition of the original " I will not serve " — alluding to Satan's " Better reign in hell than serve in heaven." Cold men of science hearing this language from him who was striving to put all human honours, titles, and powers below his own, might think that some scientific test of his humility would not be amiss. The Pope rose, the savans knelt down, and he gave them the benediction. Having then resumed his seat on the Throne, " Here I am," he said, familiarly ; " here I am, to receive your gifts." There was a scientific test of their professions ! The President of the Academy of the Immaculate advanced, presented his volume containing the address and signatures, and with it an elegant purse full of gold. The head of the next deputation foUowed, presented his volume and his purse of gold, and so on, until the seventeen had completed their offering. The Pope had a pleasant word for each. Then saying, " God grant that your THE HOMAGE OF SCIENCE 375 example may be followed by many," he closed the audience.1 How different was it now from what it was when " science was the echo of the Pontiff," or even from what it was when Galileo had to face the Inquisition, and to argue with Bellarmine ! a At the latter moment, the two revolted tongues, German and English, with their smaUer kinsmen, Dutch, Danish, and Swedish, were unknown in the schools. Their libraries were yet to be. They had but lately received into them the source of their literary life — the Bible. But into them had the Bible come, not lapped in the languor of the cloister, but instinct with the life of a great revival. Except a few northern schools, which had made themselves a name in the strife of the Reformation, aU seats of learning on the Continent were on the side of the Pope. Now, how changed ! Out of his own Model State, where were the univer sities canonically instituted ? They had ceased to be. Mean time, the nations which at the Reformation were but emerging out of barbarism, had become learned in aU the learning of the ancients and moderns. The two revolted tongues, German and English, had fiUed the world with a literature such as the Latin, even when Augurs and Pontiffs were called Cicero and Aurelius, had never known. The Portuguese, which had at one time promised to be the lingua franca of all the ports from Morocco to Japan, had given place, first, largely to the Dutch, then universally to the English. The Spanish and French, which had promised to divide between them North and South America, were sundered, and were both overshadowed by a dominating growth of English. That north-western tongue, cradled amid stern winds, was found by the Reformation as the rude but hardy dialect of some six or seven unlettered millions. Now it had become the wealthy and flexible, the noble and ah" -expressing speech of at least eighty millions. Thirty millions in Europe, with between forty and fifty mUlions 1 Civiltd, VII. ix. 358-9. 2 Valuable hght has lately been thrown on the two trials of Galileo by Dr. Reusch, of Bonn ; and Signor Berti, ex-Minister of Instruction in Italy, has published the original record of the trial. The last I have hot seen. 376 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE in America, caUed it, with a common famUy pride and a common family joy, their mother-tongue. In Australasia, a future Europe promised to caU it her mother-tongue. In India it was teaching the pundit, in China the mandarin, in Japan the daimio, in Africa the Kaffir chief, the Negro freedman, and the merchant of the Nile. That single language had now more schools and coUeges, more laboratories and institutes of research, more books and journals, more patronage and discussion of Art, than all the Papal languages put together. And as to the German, if the lack of equal liberty had reined the people in, while the effects of the Thirty Years' War, joined to those of the chronic splitting up into smaU States, had prevented their growth and expansion in a similar measure, they had, neverthe less, with huge and patient power, piled up a Titanic literature, and in many a movement in the higher march of inteUect their banner led the van. Men of the Catholic schools of Germany so felt their own superiority to the science and literature of actual Rome, that the strokes of their contempt not unfre quently feU even on the reputed sages of the Curia, sometimes laid on in a fashion more scholastic than scholarly. In the General Congregation of January 4, the Curia had the satisfaction of hearing, not only a diocesan bishop, but a German one, defend the Draft.1 It was Bishop Martin, of Paderborn, to whose eminent qualities official writers bear loud testimony, though in the eyes of the Liberal Catholics he does not seem to be a prodigy. He blamed the manner in which the bishops had treated a document proposed by the Pontiff, which ought to have been handled with reverence, and rebuked such language as " to be erased." He desired the adoption of the SyUabus just as it stood. As the way to bring back the stray sheep to the Holy Father, he enjoined the recognition of his infaUibUity, which would reclaim Protestants. Both the expectation of Martin and Manning that the new dogma would facilitate the conversion of Protestants, and that of aU the Ultramontane leaders that it would hasten the submission of governments to the Lord Paramount of the world, lose part 1 Tagebuch, p. 63. THE CHALDEAN PATRIARCH 377 of their marveUousness when we find bishops like Bonjean pro claiming it as of great importance for the conversion of Hindus. Bishop David, of St. Brieuc, alluding to Martin's warning, said if he must not say that the Draft was to be erased, he would say that if it was dead let it rise again ; but some bishop must breathe new life into it. Friedrich says that Cardinal BUio was particularly hurt by this speech. Bernardou, Archbishop of Sens, read a speech for Audu, the Patriarch of Babylon. The Chaldean solemnly pleaded against the leveUing proceedings of Rome, maintained the ancient immunities of his Church, and ventured to throw out a warning against innovations, lest the Orientals should be altogether alienated. He afterwards received a message to repair to the Vatican, and to come unattended. About seven o'clock on that January night, the man of seventy-eight passed the Swiss guards, in their stripes and slashes of yeUow, black, and red, with their halberds and their helmets, and whUe lonelily pacing the corridors, had time to remember how the house of the Inquisition stood over the way, and how utterly he was in the power of the King of the Vatican. It wiU be some time before what befeU him comes to light. Theiner, the celebrated Prefect of the Vatican Archives, had been long engaged, as was universaUy known, in preparing for publication the Acta of the CouncU of Trent. He had been arrested in this project. This was attributed to the instigation of the Jesuits. On January 4 Friedrich went to Theiner to beg permission to consult the Acta of Trent. " Theiner told me that he was now forbidden to let any one even see the Acta. All I could obtain from him was this — he showed me the pUes of the copied documents in the distance " (p. 65). There is a picture for the days of an Oecumenical Council ! -* 1 This tale of Friedrich may form a pendant to one of Theiner's own. He relates how, in seeking for Tridentine documents which ought to have been in the Vatican, but were not, and some of which were in the library of Lord Guildford, he proposed to make a journey all the way to England. His brother oratorian, Dr. Newman, applied to Lord Guildford requesting that Theiner might have access to them. This was refused. That nobleman could not see why the Prefect of the 378 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE The day foUowing, another German on the banks of the Spree was busy with the Council. To Bismarck the state of things so far was chaotic. " I should not think it wise," he says to Arnim, " for us to intermeddle in this misty chaos, where we do not yet see clearly enough to choose the right basis of operations." He sees that Rome may make aggressions, but rests in proud repose in the power of the nation to throw her back within her proper bounds. The continuance of peaceful relations is greatly to be desired, but it is not for the govern ment to attempt to give a direction to the events of the Council. It can only cherish sympathy with the efforts of the German bishops, and, if they desire it, give them its support. Bismarck expressly declines to support by any diplomatic step the pro posal for vote by nations. Such a step would involve a serious recognition of the pretensions of the Curia. We must, he says, hold ourselves aloof from the CouncU, and free to bring its conclusions to the bar of our laws. He, therefore, does not deem it wise to attempt a permanent united meeting of diplo matists, with a view to influence the CouncU. AU that can be done is to encourage the German bishops, and to assure them that their rights wiU be maintained in their own country. But they must be made fuUy to understand that serious changes in the organization of the Church would compel the government to alter its relation to her, both in legislation and in adminis tration.1 Had Bismarck known aU the plans of the five pre ceding years, and aU the events that were to foUow, it is doubtful if he could have taken a better course. And had his main object been to live at peace with Rome, and not merely to do the wisest thing for Germany, he could hardly have guarded more jealously against undue or premature interference. Vatican Archives should come so far to examine documents of which there must be abundance there I Poor Theiner had found poverty, not abundance. There had been removal, as well as concealment. His ill success in England did not prevent him from saying that the honour of first publishing the minutes of Paleottl was due to the Rev. Joseph Mendham, an Anglican presbyter, — " which, certainly, is not to our honour or glory " (vol. i. pp. vi. vii.). 1 Cologne Gazette, April i, 1874, CHAPTER V The Second Public Session — Swearing a Creed never before known in a General Council — Really an Oath including Feudal Obedience THE same tone of disappointment in which the Civiltd had said that as the discussion of the Draft was not con cluded, no Decree would be promulged in the second session, pervaded the additional remark that the world would describe as a vain ceremony the recital of the creed with which it had been resolved to fill up the day. Writers of different shades, as if by concert, did describe it as a religious ceremony, — a mere ceremony, an empty ceremony, a vain ceremony, and a tedious ceremony. So far from taking this session as a vain show, we take it for one of the most distinctive footmarks left in the deposits of history by the mammoth which we caU the Papacy. Without contrivance of man — in contravention, indeed, of arrangements made with patient forethought — the Vatican Council was com peUed, under guise of reciting a creed, to exhibit its bishops as if barons swearing aUegiance to a prince in peril of losing his estates. The creed recited was one never before seen or heard of in any General Council. An apparent accident set the faith of the early Church, and the modern composite oath and creed, before the eye of history in a contrast sharper than any artist could have devised. A cause similar to that which led to this day being employed in setting face to face the old creed and the new, had at Trent led to the act that formed the reverse of the medal. At Trent, on the day fixed for the third session, no Decree was ready for promulgation, just as none was ready at the Vatican on that fixed for the second. Consequently, at Trent, after much reluctance, the Fathers, 379 380 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE rather than let the day appointed pass without a session, con sented to fiU up the time in doing what many of them felt would expose them to ridicule — in reciting the creed. Thus did they create an example which the Curia now followed. Two unforeseen accidents, linked together only by the association of precedent, led to the placing of the Catholic creed as it existed up to the CouncU of Trent, and the Romish creed as framed after Trent, side by side in a framework so impressive as to ensure the exhibition of the two in contrast to aU ages. At Trent the Fathers said that they would set forth as the firm and sole foundation, against which the gates of heU should not prevail, the creed used by the Roman Church, which was the principium, wherein " all who confessed Christ " of necessity concurred, — an expression which seems as if it was the last breath of catholicity on the lips of the Papal society. Another slight reminiscence of catholicity appears when it is said that the creed is given in the exact words in which it is read " in aU churches," — a terminology proper to apostolic pens, or to the lips of our glorified Lord, speaking to His servant John, when the word " churches " was the Christian vernacular, and " church " as a collective was rarely used, and only in the very largest sense possible. Led by a way which they knew not, the Fathers at Trent set up a memorial of the faith of the Christian Churches as they found it in the creed. Led also by a way which they knew not, the Fathers at the Vatican set up an everlasting remem brance of what their predecessors at Trent had done with the faith. The Cardinals arrived on the morning of the Epiphany, dressed in red ; but they changed to the white proper to the day. Patriarchs, primates, archbishops, bishops, abbots and generals of orders, were all in white, except the Orientals, who had never surrendered to the primacy of Rome on the sacred subject of vestments. The Pope entered the hall, as he had done at the first session, between AntoneUi and Mertel. [ After Mass, Dominicis-Tosti and Philip RaUi, the two Pro- THE POPE SWEARS TO A NEW CREED 381 moters of the Council,- reverently drew nigh to the throne, and addressing the Pontiff, said :— Inasmuch as, by ancient appointment of the Fathers, the sacred Councils of the Church have been wont to set the Confession of the Faith in the forefront of all their doings, as a buckler against every heresy, we, therefore, the Promoters of this Vatican Council, do humbly pray that profession of the Catholic faith in the form prescribed by thy predecessor of sacred memory, Pius IV, be made this day, in public session by all the Fathers of this Vatican Council. The Pontiff replied, " We enjoin and command accordingly." Then arose the sovereign from his throne, took off the sacred mitre, and, with loud and clear voice, recited for the first time in the history of man, as the belief of a General Council, the creed of Pius IV. Near the end of it, he came to the clause which swears obedience to the Roman Pontiff. This he omitted. The conclusion swears to maintain the faith just recited, and, as much as in the confessor lies, to enforce it " on aU those committed to him." The Pope simply said to enforce it " upon all," and then he closed according to the regular form, — " I, Pius, promise, vow, and swear, so help me God, and these God's Holy Gospels." Bishop Fessler, Secretary of the CouncU, and Bishop Val enziani, now came to the throne. The Pontiff handed to them the creed of Pius IV, just as he had handed his own Decrees at the first session. Valenziani, ascending the pulpit, recited it, in his own name and in that of all the Fathers. When he came to the portentous obedience clause, omitted by him who owes no account to man, tribunal, or nation, the bishop, read, " To the Roman Pontiff, successor of the blessed Peter, prince of the Apostles, and Vicar of Jesus Christ, I promise and swear true obedience," — as if it was an installation in a feudal order. No wonder that Canon PeUetier, writing in Frond (vol. vii. p. 170), should say that this act of homage, " in the circumstances of which aU are aware, had an immense importance." Valenziani then concluded the form as the Pope had done, only, instead of enforcing obedience " upon aU," it was " on all committed to him," 382 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Patrizi, the Senior Cardinal present,1 now rose, came to the throne, knelt, laid his hand on the volume of the Gospels, and lifting up his voice, said, " I, Constantine, Bishop of Porto and Rufina, promise, vow, and swear according to the form now read, so help me God, and these God's Holy Gospels "; and he kissed the book. Then Cardinals and Patriarchs, one by one, after them Pri mates, Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, and Generals of Orders, in regular gradation of rank, first two and two, and, later, four and four,2 came successively to the throne, and during the space of two hours, knelt down, laid the hand on the book, repeated the above words, each inserting his own name, kissed the book, and so swore allegiance to the King of the Vatican, under the form of a profession of the simple and loving faith of Christ. The two creeds, recited at Trent and in St. Peter's, are below, in paraUel columns — the one representing what the Council of Trent found, and the other representing what it left. Future epochs wUl have to mark subsequent innovations. We put the clause forming the basis of the new dogmas in italics. The other italics are those given in Dr. ChaUoner's recension 3 :— The Catholic Creed before The Romish Creed after the the Reformation Reformation " I, N., with a firm faith, " I, N., with a firm faith, believe and profess all and believe and profess aU and every one of the things which every one of the things which are contained in that creed are contained in that creed which the holy Roman Church which the holy Roman Church maketh use of ; namely — maketh use of ; namely — " I believe in one God, the "I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all heaven and earth, and of all 1 The Dean of the Sacred College, Cardinal Mattei, was unable to attend the sittings. 2 Acta Sancta Sedis. 3 The Grounds of the Catholic Faith, p. 3. The obedience clause in Challoner, not being meant for the clergy, does not contain the word swear. For the same reason is the final clause, which implies authority, omitted. The translation of that clause given here is from Mr. Butler's version. THE TWO CREEDS 383 things visible and invisible : and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages : God of God; Light of light; true God of true God; be gotten, not made ; consub stantial to the Father, by whom all things were made ; who, for us men, and for our salva tion, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man. Was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate ; He suffered and was buried, and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures ; He ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father, and is to come again with glory to judge the living and the dead ; of whose kingdom there shall be no end. And in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Life-giver, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who together with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who spoke by the Prophets ; and (I be lieve) one holy catholic and apostolic Church, I confess one baptism for the remission of sins, and I look for the resurrec tion of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen." things visible and invisible : and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages : God of God; Light of light; true God of true God ; begotten, not made ; consubstantial to the Father, by whom all things were made ; who, for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man. Was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate ; He suffered and was buried, and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures ; He ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father, and is to come again with glory to judge the living and the dead ; of whose kingdom there shall be no end. And in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Life-giver, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who together with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who spoke by the Prophets ; and (I believe) one holy catholic and apostolic Church, I confess one baptism for the remission of sins, and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen. " I most steadfastly admit and embrace apostolical and ecclesi astical traditions, and ail other observances and constitutions of the same Church. " I also admit the holy Scrip tures, according to that sense 384 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE which our holy Mother, the Church, has held, and does hold, to whom it belongs to judge of the true sense and interpreta tion of the Scriptures ; neither wfll I ever take and interpret them otherwise than according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers. " I also profess that there are truly and properly seven sacra ments of the new law, instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord, and necessary for the salvation of mankind, though not all for every one ; to wit, baptism, confirmation, eucharist, penance, extreme unction, orders, and matrimony ; and that they con fer grace ; and that of these, baptism, confirmation, and orders cannot be reiterated without sacrilege. " I also receive and admit the received and approved cere monies of the Catholic Church, used in the solemn administra tion of all the aforesaid sacra ments. " I embrace and receive all and every one of the things which have been defined and declared in the holy Council of Trent, concerning original sin and justification. " I profess, likewise, that in the Mass there is offered to God a true, proper, and propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead. And that in the most holy sacrament of the eucharist there is truly, really, and sub stantially, the body and blood, THE TWO CREEDS 385 together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ ; and that there is made a conversion of the whole sub stance of the bread into the body, and of the whole sub stance of the wine into the blood ; which conversion the Catholic Church calls tran substantiation. " I confess, also, that under either kind alone, Christ is re ceived whole and entire, and a true sacrament. " I constantly hold that there is a purgatory, and that the souls detained therein are helped by the suffrages of the faithful. " Likewise, that the saints reigning together with Christ are to be honoured and invo- cated, and that they offer prayers to God for us ; and that their relics are to be held in veneration. " I most firmly assert that the images of Christ, and of the Mother of God, ever Virgin, and also of the other saints, are to be had and retained, and that due honour and veneration are to be given to them. " I also affirm that the power of indulgences was left by Christ in the Church, and that the use of them is most wholesome to Christian people. " I acknowledge the holy catholic and apostolical Roman Church, The Mother and Mistress of all Churches ; And I Promise [and Swear] True Obedience to the Bishop of Rome, successor 25 386 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE to St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and Vicar of Jesus Christ. " I likewise undoubtedly re ceive and profess all other things delivered, defined, and declared by the sacred Canons and General Councils, and particu larly by the holy CouncU of Trent. And I condemn, reject, and anathematise all things contrary thereto, and aU here sies which the Church has con demned, rejected, and anathema tised. " This true Catholic faith, Out of Which None Can Be Saved, which I now freely profess, and truly hold, I, N., promise, vow, and swear most constantly to hold and profess the same whole and entire, with God's assist ance, to the end of my life ; and to procure, as far as lies in my power, that the same shall be held, taught, and preached by all who are under me, or are en trusted to my care by virtue of my office. So help me God and these Holy Gospels of God." Among the seven hundred men who repeated this set of propositions, unknown to Holy Scripture, we may feel assured that there were not wanting some who as they approached the end of the old, thought, That was the faith as it was professed before Luther ; and as they entered upon the new, thought Where was this religion before Luther ? What a contrast between the old and the new ! If ever it was true, it is here true, that the old is better. Under the old creed, the conscience is not hampered by any question about the authority of traditions, either apostolic so-called, or such as were confessedly ecclesiastical. The conscience is not perplexed EFFECT OF MULTIPLIED DOGMAS 387 with a fear of interpreting Holy Scripture differently from the unanimous opinion of the Fathers. It is not weighted with seven sacraments, not contracted with scruples about mere rites and modes of administration, not burdened by having to take for gospel every word which some past CouncU has said on some specified doctrine ; not bewUdered by a professed repeti tion ofttimes of the sacrifice once offered up for ever, full, per fect, and sufficient ; not materialized by transubstantiation of the substance of the bread and wine, not mystified by taking half a sacrament for a whole one, and by asserting that the deliberate evasion of Christ's sacramental command was a true performance of it ; not secularized by the mercantUe reckonings of purgatory ; not let down from filial Christianity towards servUe polytheism by the worship of saints, relics, and images ; not demorahzed by the traffic in indulgences ; not narrowed by the domination of one municipal Church over all others ; not cramped and degraded by identification with the sins and follies of one human head, much less by an aUegiance to that head, as a lord of the faith and a sovereign of the conscience ; not envenomed by anathematizing all who do not accept every article that we ourselves accept. Trent diminished the comprehensiveness of the Papal Society by many new and some grotesque conditions. The present Pontiff has added others, and so far has the shrinking process been now carried that a reductio ad absurdum cannot be logicaUy far off. Believing too much, which comes to believing too little, ends in believing nothing. AU these successive sub missions of conscience to " authority," of spiritual inquiry and private judgment to priestly dictation, end in the paralysis of the believing faculty. They render a man capable of nothing but submitting. The ordinary oath of the Papal bishops has often been shown to be in substance the oath of a feudal vassal to his liege lord. It has but a flavour of any evangelical office or work of the soul-winning ministry of Christ. The Emperor Joseph II clearly saw that any man bound to the Pope by that oath could not be reckoned as the subject of any other prince, except by 388 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE one of those generous fictions which on behalf of the Pope, by way of exception, governments have admitted. But even that oath was not enough ; the confession of faith in God must, for aU the clergy, be turned into an oath of loyalty to the Bishop of Rome — an oath to a human head in a creed ! The process of taking the oath lasted, as we have said, two hours. The crowd was not great. The session did not raise enthusiasm in any one. Friedrich, who viewed the act of homage from the gallery for theologians, said that nothing could be more tedious. He did not feel flattered with his company in that gallery. Formerly, only doctors were known at Councils as theologians, and, as we have seen, they had real work to do. Now, he says, the chaplains and secretaries of bishops, and even the men who carry the red caps of the Car dinals, figure as theologians — " an edifying company." Even the Stimmen had only a few sentences for this session ; and the Civiltd, though read principally by persons who may be supposed to have already seen the creed of Pius IV, fiUed up room by printing it at full. Quirinus wondered whether this "profusion of superfluous oaths was reconcilable with the scriptural prohibition of needless oaths." They had seven hundred and forty-seven oaths taken. Only the genius of M. VeuiUot sufficed, so far as we re member, to cheer the gloom of the day. It was the Epiphany, and in the portions of Scripture included in the offices of the day, he saw the interpretation of the ceremony. The royaUy robed potentates who bowed before the enthroned priest-king were the kings of the Gentiles prostrating themselves and worshipping the Church, presenting their gold, and frankin cense and, myrrh. The words of Isaiah, " The nations shaU come to Thy light, and the kings to the brightness of Thy rising," had the same grand meaning. So he cries (i. 79) : — Behold St. Peter's ! The throne of the Pontiff and the Cardinal at the altar, and between throne and altar eight hundred bishops! Behold the prophecy and behold the fact ! M. VeuiUot remarks that in the galleries were present SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CEREMONY 389 diplomatists and princes who had faUen ; but the Church abides ! In the crowd, he says, was an Italian " revolutionist, Signor Minghetti, once a subject and minister of the Pope. He bowed with propriety under the benediction of his Father and his master, who was betrayed by him ; but he abides ! " The faUen princes represented those who, having supported the Papacy, both temporal and spiritual, had been brought to ruin by its bad teaching and worse example. Signor Minghetti and his bow represented those who, rejecting the temporal Papacy, wished to conserve at least the show of the spiritual Papacy. It is for future time to teU whether they to whom he will be queath the tangled undertaking, wiU take their place with ex-kings, ex-dukes, ex-princes, and so forth, in the gallery of failures, or whether they will take their place among the wise men who, rejecting the spiritual as worse than the temporal Papacy, and risking all to found States on the principles of the Word of God, have buUt up great and happy realms. Italy not does think a principle worth running any risk for. She thinks it practical to say to the Papacy, We have found thee unfaithful in the unrighteous mammon, and therefore do we take it from thee, but we commit to thy trust the true riches. The Acta Sancta Sedis say that no date was fixed for the next session. The confidence in the readiness of the Fathers to swallow a large pamphlet of creed in a few days was shaken. " No one," is it pensively added, " could foresee when Decrees would be in readiness, because many Fathers might probably be lengthy in their discourses." 1 The learned editor seems as if he would fain emulate the flight of M. VeuiUot, but he soars with weighted wing. In a long apostrophe to Rome, he styles Pius IX " the captain who gloriously fiUs the place of thine ancient Caesars." 2 In one of his speeches made to Roman professors, Pius IX calls himself " the Caesar 1 Acta S. S., v. 327. 2 " Sub eo duce qui locum veterum tuorum Caesarum gloriose occu- pat." — Ibid. 324. 390 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE who now addresses you,1 and to whom alone are obedience and fidelity due." It is evident that the Curia left this session under the damping effects of a disappointment. It is also evident that some of the bishops felt that they had now performed two sessions, with a month between them, and that the only distinct impression left upon the mind was that they had been twice exhibited, before the whole world, at the feet of a man more richly robed than themselves, seated on a throne in the house of God, and calling himself Father of kings and princes, and Governor of the world. Canon PeUetier points out the great advantage which the Church had obtained by having the Creed of Pius IV " consecrated " in a General Council. 1 Discorsi, i. p. 255. CHAPTER VI Speech of the Pope against the Opposition — Future Pohcy set before France — Count Arnim's Views — Resumed Debate — Haynald — A New Mortal Sin — Count Daru and French Policy — Address calling for the New Dogma — Counter Petitions against the Principle as well as the Opportuneness ON the Sunday foUowing this disappointing session, the Pope received fifteen hundred persons in a public audience. Even the language of M. VeuiUot does not exagger ate the effect of his speech upon that occasion. " What he said on the Council wUl loudly resound through the Catholic universe." What he said cut the bishops of the Opposition, and Liberal Catholics generaUy, to the heart. We quote from the version of M. VeuiUot : — Would-be wise men would have us treat certain questions charily, and not march against the ideas of the age, but I say that we must speak the truth, in order to establish liberty. We must never fear to proclaim the truth or to condemn error. I want to be free, and want the truth to be free. Pray then, weep, force the Holy Sphit, by your supplications, to support and enlighten the Fathers of the Council, that the truth may triumph and error may be condemned. After his first version of the speech, M. Veuillot said that a word had been " unfortunately omitted." The Pope had said that those who opposed certain measures were blind leaders of the blind. Well, if the leaders want not to lead any but the blind, and cannot see their game, the Church, pre serving her own hberty, will know how to win without them or against them, the game which they obstinately set themselves to lose (i. pp. 86 and ioo). This was treated, not as a mere gust of temper, but as a calculated appeal through the press to the clergy, and to the 392 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE devout generaUy, against the bishops of the Opposition. Yet the longing of the Pope for his liberty was natural. He had always believed himself to be infaUible. The Jesuits told him that the fuU recognition of that attribute, and the free use of it, were the only remedies for the misfortunes of the Papacy, and for the troubles of mankind. He read in the Civiltd how all nations were at this moment looking to him as the one saviour, capable of lifting them out of the Slough of Despond into which the Reformation first and the Revolution next had plunged them. He heard of faithful bishops, learned authors, able journalists, one after another, intimating in prophetic strains an era of glory to foUow the recognition of his rights. All asked, how could the world do otherwise than stumble and fall so long as the divinely appointed guide was not recognized ? AU asserted that nothing could prevent the world from rising up, healed and created anew, when the Vicar of God, acknow ledged by the Church, in the plentitude of this authority, should speak the word, Let there be light, at which chaos would flee away, and when he should foUow it up with the supreme word to kings and nations alike, which aU must learn to obey. Heretics would resist, but the faithful, under the banner of the Vicar of God, would certainly prevaU. Nothing stood in the way of all this blessing and glory but a few bishops. These bishops were represented as being partly calculating men, unwUling to get into trouble with their governments ; partly cowards, who actuaUy feared that the standard of his Holiness might faU in the struggle. Some were represented as jealous priests, paltering about the little prerogatives of their Sees, instead of merging aU in the glories of the Holy See. If, in a matter so great, the Pope chafed at delay caused by such inconsiderable men, it was not more than might be expected from human nature so incensed, and so persuaded, even in the case of one less vehemently suspected of vanity and self-wiU than is Pius IX. He said that some thought that the Council was to set everything to rights, and some that it would ac complish nothing. "Iam but a poor man, a poor feeble man, but I am Pope, Vicar of Jesus Christ, and head of the Catholic FUTURE BUSINESS OF STATESMEN 393 Church, and I have assembled the Council, which wiU do its work." 4 M. VeuiUot also was becoming a little impatient. He ap parently wanted to see the begining of the " clearing away " of which he had spoken in 1867. The foUowing passage, tracing out the pohcy that might save the Second Empire, is a speci men of skiUed writing, clear to his clerical readers, dim to heedless Parisians. The new minister (Ollivier) must accept this program : — To break with the Gallican, revolutionary, and Caesarian prejudice (which are aU one) by frankly recognizing the liberty of the Church ; to assure aU liberty by and through the assertion of this hberty, as mother and mistress ; to prepare the accessions necessary to the honour and the conservation of peace ; to permit men to be made against this perpetual plague of revolution which exudes only courtiers of the mob, or courtiers of Cassar ; this is the grand game he has to play. In the interest of the Emperor and the dynasty, I wish he may win it. Alas ! during the last twenty years the game has been lost, more than once, by the fault of the chief player ! But Providence is pleased to be obstinate, and to leave the game open, with favourable cards in the same hands (vol. i. p. 98). In the gloaming of these January evenings, two men, might be seen walking somewhere between the Ripetta and the Via Condotti, and the tall figure of one of them was that of Count Harry von Arnhh. A letter which he on one such occasion handed to the other was published, in 1874, by the Presse, of Vienna,2 and bore the date of the day before the impatient speech of the Pope. To whom the letter was addressed is not state'd. AUuding to the petition of the bishops, Count 1 " A French prelate, commenting upon the text of this discourse, sneered at the simpletons who allowed themselves to be led by a one- eyed man (un borgne). It is well known that the Bishop of Orleans has lost an eye by study." — Ce Qui se Passe au Concile, quoting the Moniteur of March 24. 2 We quote from the Cologne Gazette, April 4, 1874, which; quoting the Presse, says, " The Count will remember the walks in the gloaming, and another by the baths of Diocletian, and so will be able to tell where tlie letters come from." 394 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE Arnim says : " You see they are modest, and organization is as defective as courage." He feels the want of practical tact in the bishops. If they had meant to succeed in their opposition, they ought to have impugned the composition of the CouncU, and the Rules imposed upon it. Had they first of aU rent the net which the Vatican and the Gesu [the Jesuit establishment] had cast over the wise but timid heads of the bishops, infalh bihty would have faUen through the meshes. The Count is not sure that the Curia will persevere with the dogma of infaUibUity ; and does not see of what advantage it would be to them, when they can at any time call a Council and prescribe to it how and what it is to speak. Some of the Fathers feel as if they were in some sort the Pope's prisoners since they have entered on the course into which they had been drawn. They had aUowed themselves to be led so'far in a certain direction during the last twenty years, that it was only when they saw that it was to be turned to earnest, that they began to ask how they could make black white at home, and how the Cathohc people would take it. That was the feeling that produced " Fulda." People belonging to the Curia say that the bishops need a couple of months in the air of Rome to inspire them with the grand conceptions of the place ; and after that aU wUl be of one mind. He cannot understand how the German Catholics are going to let five hundred Italians, and among them three hundred boarders of the Pope, dictate laws to them in spite of their own bishops. Under the pretence of Catholicity, exclusive Romish- Italian formulae are imposed on the Catholic mind of aU nations. If Rome resented the obstinacy of the provincials, some of the provincials began to open their eyes at what they found in Rome. Friedrich quotes one well acquainted with the Curia, whose words may be matched out of Liverani. " The Car dinals," said this authority, " are red-stockinged . . . not fit, with the exception of four or five, to be curates in a viUage church." Friedrich himself had begun to think that their principal function was " parading." But at that Court did not everything depend upon parading ? Many of the Cardinals DIFFERING VIEWS AS TO MONKS 395 might be no better men than the tongue of Rome (not a scrupu lous one) made them, and no greater theologians than Liverani and Friedrich said that they were, but some of them assuredly had great abUities, and all had shown themselves to be blessed with the faculty of getting on, which is generaUy some quali fication for ruling. Disgusted by the low appearance of the monks and their mendicity, Friedrich yet confessed that, in present circumstances, such swarms of them had an advantage, as keeping a certain sort of population out of mischief. How different the view of M. VeuiUot ! To him the monks were the ideal of Christ's benefit to mankind. Free from the world, from the care even of a name or a tomb, the world " must allow their crushing sandals to pass over the poisons which its pride has sown " (i. p. 223). It remains to be seen whether the plants springing from seeds that quickly faU from a free Bible, a free soul, a free pulpit, and a free press, wiU die crushed as poison plants under the sandals of the monk, or whether they wiU yet flourish like grass of the earth, and the fruit of them shall shake like Lebanon, when fakir and monk shall together be remembered among the things that fatally decay in the shade of a growth which, though at first the least of herbs, becomes afterwards the greatest of aU trees. In the street Friedrich met Graf A., doubtless one who then proudly fiUed a proud post, but who now unhappily lies under a heavy cloud. The Count told him that a petition in favour of bringing forward the question of infallibility, drawn up in Manning's sense was already signed by five hundred bishops. Another of Friedrich' s touches is, that Janus always lay on Darboy's 4:able, and Hergenrother's Aftti-Janus on that of Ketteler. After caUing the latter work very dishonest, he says " The upshot of this book is, that the Pope alone is in vested with divine authority, and before this Baal of the Jesuits, the majority of the CouncU means to bow the knee. WiU not that amount to decreeing the death of the Church ? She may lay herself down crying, ' Jesuits, you have conquered me.' " As a specimen of what bishops even in Council assembled had come to, he quotes the memorable words of Hergenrother, 396 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE " The bishops have nothing to do but to set the conciliar seal to a work which the Jesuit Schrader has prepared." " Happy bishops," cries the poor theologian, himself tor mented by opinions, and unable to let others believe for him. " Happy bishops ! you may give dinners, see works of art, take your siestas, parade in pluvial and mitre, for the Jesuit Father has taken care of all the rest ; and, then, setting to the concUiar seal is not hard work ! There is nothing to do but to say Placet, and aU is over " Much depended on the inter pretation men gave to their oath. Canon PeUetier (Frond, vii. p. 170) says, not unnaturally, that at the moment when the Fathers prostrated themselves at the feet of the Pope, the majority was formed. All who understood " obey " in the sense of the Court, would vote what the Pope told them to /vote. But Ginoulhiac, of Grenoble, soon to be Primate of France, had taken care, beforehand, to protest against such an interpretation. Though expressing some fear in citing it, he did cite the language of Bellarmine, to the effect that so free must a Council be that the bishops, their oath notwithstanding, must not only say what they think, but mu^t__eyenproceed against the Pope should be he convicted 6L__heresy!C>Such language, in the mouth of Bellarmine, as contrasted with that of Deschamps, Manning, and the other zealots of infallibility, marks the progress made by the Papal claims in our day. " The General Congregations were resumed on January 8, when two new Drafts on discipline were distributed. The Congregation of the ioth was remarkable for striking speeches, and for an unforeseen turn of the debate. Haynald, Arch bishop of Colocza, replied to the few who had defended the Draft, especially to Martin, and Rass of Strasburg. He charged them with having attempted to deprive the Fathers even of the liberty left to them by the Rules, for they had reproached them for discussing what was laid before them. Did not even the formula at the head of the Decree, for speaking on which Strossmayer had been called to order, say, " the Council approving " ? which surely implied that it was open to 1 Le Concile, etc., par Mgr. L'Eveque de Grenoble. Paris, 1869. HAYNALD AND MAIGNAN 397 it to disapprove. Martin had said, We shall say " It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us ; " But, rejoined Haynald, though Martin may know that we are to say so, we do not know it. This speech was described as one of remarkable power, second in that respect only to the speech of Stross mayer. Cardinal Capalti, one of the Presidents, listened with outstretched neck, and both hands behind his ears ; but so skilfuUy was the discourse constructed, that Haynald escaped being called to order. He was often applauded, especiaUy at the conclusion. It is said that Cardinal BUio, who was reponsible for the Draft, being, for a Cardinal, strong in German, knew three words of it, — Deutsche (German), and freie Wissenschaft (free science). He leaned back, often repeating, with an inward shudder, Deutsche, freie Wissen schaft. Bishop Maignan, of Chalons, who followed Haynald, did not mount the pulpit, but stood before the Presidents. His speech was also spoken of as having been very striking. He attacked the Draft, especially its phraseology. What, he asked, was meant by anima est forma corporis (the soul is the form of the body) ? The Greek Bishop of Grosswardein defended the Draft, saying that at first he had doubts, but that the more he studied it the more he was satisfied. As he had previously said, in the meeting of German and Hungarian prelates, " I do not like many dogmas," x when he next appeared among them some one said, " Greek faith is no faith," and he appeared among them no more. A Chaldean prelate, Kajat, speaking with with a fine, clear voice, said, " It was scarcely becoming for a General Council to be occupied with matters so local as the opinions of this or that German professor " ; and repeated the unwelcome words, " Free science," as Haynald and Maignan had done. The debate now seemed as if it might prove very 1 How strong this language was considered in Rome may be judged from what the Civiltd said of the Minister of Public Instruction, Signor Bonghi : "In the sitting of May 14, 1873, Bonghi, then a private member, dared to say, blaspheming like a true son of Lucifer, ' The Catholic Church has multiplied her dogmas too much ' " (IX ix. 242). 398 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE searching. The minority had strong, if Ul-grounded, hopes, but a new proof of the way in which the Rules played with deliberation was now sprung upon them. If a free assembly can close a discussion when it deems it already ample, it can also continue it so long as the conscience of its members cries out for a hearing. After the speech of the Bishop of Gross- wardein, up rose the President, and said that, in pursuance of power given in the Rules, of Withdrawing a Draft Decree when disputed, the Draft should now be withdrawn from the CouncU, and should be remitted to the Committee, to be moulded by it. What ! could not the Councfl go on with its investigation ? Had it not control over a proposition once laid before it ? No ; the Twenty-four, with the theologians of the Court, were now in sole possession of the proposed measure ! Had the Council been free to form itself into a committee, or to select one from among its own members after this discussion, doubtless some of the men who had shown that they were capable of sifting the clauses would have been put upon the committee, beside the few who had defended the Draft. But that was the very danger which the Nine had foreseen, and against which they had provided by a permanent committee, elected before the question was argued. This provision was effective for its end, reducing the part left to the bishops to that of making Latin speeches in rows, according to rank and seniority. One other liberty they had — the momentous one of saying Ay or No. Had not the CouncU been weighted with creatures of the Court, that single liberty might have sufficed to stay the great organic change necessary to the scheme of reconstruction. We do not know whether the sitting we have just described * is the one of which Quirinus stated that Cardinal AntoneUi withdrew from it much disgusted, saying to a diplomatist that if the CouncU went on so it would never have done. While, therefore, the Curia, disgusted with the bishops, had seen their perfect work torn to pieces day by day, now the bishops, astounded at the Curia, saw the future creed shut up 1 We have taken the outline of this sitting from the Ada Sancta Sedis, and in the filling up we have principally followed Friedrich. TREATMENT OF THE BISHOPS 399 in secret even from them ! In its absence, they began on the fourteenth to discuss discipline. That was a notable day. It witnessed the creation of a new mortal sin. The Acta do not contain the document by which this was done,1 ^ In Councils that were really general, a Christian bishop would have con sidered it a duty to tell his clergy and people what he said, and what he heard others say, about the faith of Christ. But on this day, Pope Pius IX turned this sacred duty of the bishop into a mortal sin. Secrecy, the genius of the Papacy, and publicity, the chUd of light, now closed for a life and death grapple. Any man of that assembly who should hereafter tell out of it what passed within it was to be guUty of mortal sin. The oath im posed before the opening upon the officers, and the injunctions of secrecy upon the bishops , had not availed . The step taken by the Pope was a loud acknowledgment that truth had leaked out. In a surly way this is admitted by the Acta Sancta Sedis. Shameless journals — effrontes ephemerides — had re ported, as having been spoken and done in the Council, things partly true and partly false. " This had probably arisen from some one or another, who lightly held the pontifical secret, having given information, so taking upon himself to ignore the dignity of the Apostolic See in treating ecclesiastical questions."2 ViteUeschi, Roman as he is, asks, — If the Council is a supreme assembly, who is entitled to impose this penalty of mortal sin ? Men of the Curia, accustomed to the making of innocent acts into sins, and of sins into licensed actions, would not scruple to read such a document in the face of such an assembly. Such is their state of conscience, that, far from feeling any shame, probably they would enjoy the idea of the shame and con fusion of conscience which they were inflicting on the bishops. But men brought up in England and America could sit there, whUe this new yoke was fastened upon them, and say not a word ! The bishops were really to be pitied. They were en tangled in the creed. Their oath had shut them in. There is 1 The" Freiburg edition does, p. 162 ; also Guerin, p. 113 ; Friedberg, p. 461 ;][and the Acta Sandce Sedis, v. p. 337. 2 v- P- 337- 400 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE no hint of a protest having been raised by any one. To speak of these genetlemen in one aspect as citizens of free nations, and in another aspect as prefects of the Pope, is scarcely any longer accurate. It is but by a fiction of the frailest sort that men so tied and bound by the chain of the foreign potentate can be caUed citizens. We have seen that the Civiltd holds it as- beneath their dignity as ambassadors to the citizens elsewhere than in Rome. Still, professing to be citizens, they were to be pitied. And if they were to be pitied, stiU more was human society to be pitied that had to bear the influence of seven hundred masters of a multitude whose consciences had come to such a pass. " A bishop," says Quirinus, " who should show a theologian, whose advice he wanted, a passage from the schema under discussion, or who should repeat an expression used in one of the speeches, incurs everlasting damnation ... A Papal theologian whom I questioned on the subject appealed simply to the statement of Boniface VIII, that the Pope holds aU rights in the shrine of his breast " (p. 164). Count Daru, who now appears on the political stage in Paris, afforded some entertainment to Don Margotti, who is to Italy what M. VeuiUot is to France, the leading Papal journalist, having, according to a saying of the Frangais, more power than aU the bishops. According to Quirinus the redoubtable pair are " the two modern Fathers." Count Daru said, on January 11, that " our national maxims in matters of religion, the independence of the civU power, and liberty of conscience, cannot be menaced." This was child's play to Don Margotti. In his view, France needed the new Pope-Suzerain almost as much as Italy needed the restoration of the old Pope-King. Don Margotti1 contends that the doctrine of modern parliaments is that they are themselves infallible. This he proves by a text from EmUe OUivier. That oracle on one occasion had said " We are justice ! " but Don Margotti prefers an infaUible Pope to an infallible people. Menabrea, Sella Minghetti, and such as they in Italy, according 1 Unitd Cattolica, January 16. NECESSITY FOR INFALLIBILITY 401 to him, represented God, the State. Margotti, therefore, looks on the mot of Ollivier as providential, for it proves the necessity of an infallible Pope- The world absolutely needs a permanent and infallible authority * if the authority is not the Pope, up starts Ollivier, and ascribes it to himself. It is time that infallibility should be defined, that we may have no more such absurdities as Ollivier proclaiming " We are justice ! " Oh, let the dogmatic definition of infallibility speedily sound from the heights of the Vatican, and free us from modern justice, which calls itself now Baroche, now Ollivier ! Freeing us from modern justice and from M. Emile Ollivier are two different matters, though it is natural for Don Mar gotti to hail as providential an opportunity of treating them as one. The assumption of infaUibUity by parliaments is rather a favourite notion of Jesuit writers. They seem to mean that any authority which wUl not acknowledge its subordina tion to the Vicar of God must claim to be itself infallible. Yet, we might deem our own Parliament wiser than the Pope and his Curia, and moraUy superior, and stUl not think them anything more than erring mortals, with infaUibUity some way off. An English member of Parliament, repeating the Jesuit oracles, says that our Parliament claims to be infallible.1 It would seem that no assertion of the Jesuits is too ridiculous to be seriously repeated by their Oxford converts, though many are kept back, but for other reasons than their absurdity. The decree in which the Parliament does declare its acts irreformable would be a great curiosity. So would even such an expression as the following, quoted by Don Margotti (January 18) from the archbishops and bishops of the pro vince of VerceUi : — Most Blessed Father, now and always shall we be found, in obedience and reverence to your Holiness, approving, and disap proving, whatever you, from your apostolic chair, do approve and disapprove ; from which chair Jesus Christ Himself speaks in the Holy Spirit to the bishops and people of the whole world. The meeting of the Italian Parliament having been post- 1 Contemporary Review, February 1 876, 26 402 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE poned, to give time to a new ministry to prepare measures, Don Margotti, viewing the paralysis of the Parliament as a moral effect of the presence of the CouncU, said (January 22) : — The word of Rome imposes silence at Florence, and the Council of the Vatican does just as our Lord once did when He closed the mouth of the Sadducees. Gentlemen, you have talked enough. Now stand still, and hear the great word of God. Your day is past, the day of the powers of darkness ; and now the days of the Lord will dawn, the days of truth and light. The Address in favour of a definition of the dogma of in fallibility had now become the talk of all. Vitelleschi (p. 85) states that it was carried round by the Archbishop of West minster, and the Fathers of the Civiltd Cattolica, as the Jesuits are called who form the editorial college of the great magazine. A letter, inviting adhesions, and signed by several bishops, chiefly belonging to the class who had not any national ties, was circulated with the address. The signatures to that document itself were headed by the names of Manning, Spalding of Baltimore, and Senestry. What had been felt from the first was now openly declared on aU hands, although the utterance of it had often been charged as a great sin upon the Liberal Catholics. We mean, that the object of the Council was the definition of Papal infallibility, and that all the rest was manoeuvring. Brief as are the historical notes in the Acta Sancta Sedis they state that we may almost say that the whole Council was convened for the sake of the fourth session.1 ViteUeschi notes the fact that the citations given in the Address to prove that earlier Councils had pro pounded Papal infallibility, were not apposite. Quirinus says that the Address " bristles with falsehood." Veuillot, on the other hand, finds its arguments cogent, — indeed, un answerable. Vitelleschi remarks that the writers speak with indifference or contempt of schisms which might arise from 1 Vol. vi. p. 3 : " Cujus causa quasi diceres concilium ipsum, tanta episcoporum frequentia, fuisse convocatum." LIBERTY IN ROME 403 the measures they demanded. Friedrich calls it a compound of untruth and slander. Veuillot urges that the contradic tions to the doctrine had now reached such a head as rendered its definition absolutely necessary. Yet all this contradic tion had arisen since the personal organ of the Pope gave the signal for an acclamation. That liberty of the Church which existed nowhere else upon this sinful earth, except in Ecuador, did exist in Rome ; and, therefore, all other liberties were secured ; that is, the liberty of doing everything not forbidden by divine authority. But printing in Rome, except by licence, was forbidden by the authority that never can be in contradiction to evangelical law. The Address for making that authority into an infallible one was, however, circulated in print, without imprimatur of any sort. This sign was understood on all hands. It was not to be mistaken. The divine authority asked for signatures. The canvass for them was keen. ViteUeschi relates that the promotors of the Address were charged with dragging a question forward prematurely, which in the natural course of things, would have come on for dis cussion when the prerogatives of the See of Rome should be considered. To defend themselves, they said that the step they had taken was sanctioned by the Cardinal Presidents. This " indiscretion," he proceeds to say, " exposed the Roman Curia to the reproach of itself begging for its own apotheosis, devoid of feelings of the simplest propriety." Even the clergy, he thinks, were disconcerted at this proceeding, except the Jesuits. These were urged on by a fatality to proclaim " the infaUibUity of Clement XIV, who abolished them, and that of Pius IX, who had almost done so too, while they must find a formula to interpret the judgment of the next Pope who shaU abolish them once more." This Roman noble accounts for the strange vehemence of Manning on the ground that he had been a Protestant : — He had seen his own religion from within, and not from without ; and had seen the Catholic religion from without, and not from 404 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE within. In Protestantism he had seen only the infinite internal divisions and subdivisions ; and in Catholicism he had admired only the magnificent effect of its unity. He had not appreciated the good results produced by the former, through moderate liberty and the constant exercise of private reason and conscience ; and he had not felt the dangers which, in the latter, flow from excessive authority. He is enamoured of authority, as much as the slave is of liberty. This want of equilibrium, and of a just Catholic feeling in his dealings respecting the Council, was charged against him, even by the most faithful and devoted of the clergy in Rome (p. 89 ; Eng. ver., 60). A counter Address was sent in from German and Hun garian prelates ; one from French, one from Italians, one from Americans, and one from Orientals. But these, not being in the interest of the Court could not be printed without a licence, and could not hope to obtain one. Even Cardinal Rauscher had failed to attain leave to print a short treatise on the Papal infallibility in Latin, and had to send it to Vienna.1 So the Opposition had to dispense with type. Then, what were they to do with their Address, when complete ? The course of their opponents was clear — they had only to send in theirs to the Commission on Proposals ; and some, in their bitter ness, said that that Commission had been formed for no other purpose than that of receiving and forwarding it. But these Opposition addresses . did not propose anything to be done, but simply requested the Pope not to have a certain thing proposed. The bishops had no power to move in the House that the subject should not be considered, or to move that it should be deferred tiU the meeting of the next General CouncU. Care had been taken that they should not have " the negative right of proposition " any more than the positive. Then, what could they do ? Nothing whatever, but what they had done already, namely, petition the Pope. Their former petition, indeed, had received no answer. StUl, that was a request for the recalling of a fait accompli, or, at least, for its modification. This, on the other hand, was only 1 Tagebuch, p. 108. INFALLIBILITY AS A DOGMA 405 a request that a thing suggested should not be done. " Can any more singular relative position be imagined," says ViteUeschi,1 " than that of a man who receives a number of people into his house, with a design of proclaiming his apo theosis, and at the same time receives from them a pressing supplication to renounce that honour ? " None of these various Addresses stated that the signers opposed the new dogma only on the ground of opportune ness. This ought to be carefuUy noted. The opposite is now almost always either asserted or assumed ; but the documents have not perished.2 Such a position was skUfully avoided. It is quite true that the only grounds, formaUy stated in aU the Addresses but one, are grounds which might be concurred in by men who objected to making the opinion of Papal infallibility into a dogma, though they did not object to it as an opinion. But the German Address was clearly distinguished from the others. It plainly and forcibly demurred to the principle, though couching its objections in terms of great courtesy. After alluding to questions of opportuneness, the German and Hungarian bishops pro ceed : — We cannot pass in silence over the fact that other grave diffi culties exist, arising out of the dicta and the acts of the Fathers of the Church, out of genuine historical documents, and out of Catholic doctrine itself, which, unless they can be entirely removed, it would be impossible that the doctrine commended in the above named address should be propounded to the Christian people as being revealed of God. Our spirit recoils from the discussion of these difficulties ; and, confiding in Thy benevolence, we implore that the necessity of such deliberations may not be imposed upon us.This is signed by men who speak of themselves as " prostrate at thy feet." This passage, however, stood in the German Address alone. The others wished to get as many signa tures as they could, and perhaps fancied that they gained ground with the Curia by omitting plain objections to the 1 P. 91 ; Eng. ver., 61. 2 Documenta, i. 250 ff. ; Friedberg, 473 ff. 406 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE principle. The American Address indicated the existence of differences on the'point of principle, by aUeging as its first reason against raising a discussion on infaUibUity, that such a discussion would " clearly show a want of union, and especi aUy of unanimity among the bishops." The German, French, and Italian Addresses put forward another point, namely, that the dignitaries belonging as they did to the most im portant Catholic nations, and knowing the probable effects of the proposed measures, felt that those effects, even with the best men, would be damaging to the cause of the Church, and would supply Jjunfriendly ones with occasion for new invasions of her rights.1 The German address, as printed in the Documenta, has forty-six signatures, including two Car dinals and the Primate of Hungary ; one American prelate Mrak, of Saut Sainte Marie, in Michigan, closed the list. The French Address has \ thirty-eight names, and among these are three Portuguese prelates and four Orientals. The Italian Address has seven names, the American twenty- seven — among which two Irish Sees, Kerry and Dromore, are represented, and a single English one, Clifton. The Oriental Address has seventeen.2 M. VeuiUot, speaking of the Opposition Addresses as one whole, said that of aU who had signed it, not two, perhaps not one, was opposed to infaUibUity in principle (i. p. 149). Later he had the candour to attack the bishops for having impugned not only the opportuneness of the definition, but the doctrine itself (i. p. 180). Archbishop Manning, however, even after the close of the Council, said, " I have never been able to hear of five bishops who denied the doctrine of Papal infaUibUity." 3 This particular statement is advanced as evi dence of a general one, that the question raised among the bishops " was a question of prudence, policy, expediency ; 1 Documenta ad Illustrandum, i. p. 251. 2 Bishop Martin's Colledio Documentorum gives nearly the same numbers, but seems to omit the American Address. It give Schwarz- enberg's note fixing the sum at 136. Dupanloup frequently calls it 140. See his reply to Deschamps, 3 Priv. Pet., iii. p. 27. PETITION AGAINST MANNING'S ADDRESS 407 not of doctrine or truth." A question not of doctrine or of truth! Forty-six prelates in a petition expressly directed against Dr. Manning's own Address had put the question as one not only of prudence, but of revealed truth, alleging against any attempt to define the dogma three classes of obstacles — those arising out of Catholic doctrine, out of the dicta and acts of the Fathers, and out of historical docu ments. Perhaps we ought, with the forty-six prelates, to say genuine historical documents. But Englishmen must be forgiven if in their limited intercourse with the Papacy they have not yet found it necessary to put labels on such words. The Donations of Constantine, and the Decretals of the Pseudo-Isidore, are historical documents, and also genuine as specimens of forgeries. The fate of the Opposition petition is wrapped in mystery. Who presented it ? how was it received ? what became of it ? are questions to which the satisfactory answer must be left to time. Some asserted that the Pope refused to receive it. Quirinus says that he returned it (p. 174). M. VeuUlot told how it was delivered at the Vatican by an ordinary messenger, and that a monsignore received it with ordinary papers. This public affront to two Cardinals and nearly a hundred and forty bishops was aggravated a few days later by the remark that it was not yet known whether thej-non- signore had ever thought weU to deliver the Address. StiU later it was said that the Pope being consulted as to what was to be done with it, said that it might go to the Commission on Proposals, he intending, personaUy, to ignore it (i. p. 202). At a yet later date, January 28, Friedrich learned that every one being afraid to present it, Cardinal Schwarzenberg sent it by his chamberlain, who delivered it to Monsignor Ricci, the Pope's chamberlain. The Pope was excessively angry, and ordered it to be sent to the Commission. When M. VeuUlot trumpeted forth this example of how to deal with cardinals, archbishops, and bishops, did he mean to suggest that other Courts might treat them with like neglect, — Courts to which these officials hold themselves 408 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE related as citizens only in an inferior order, an order which " obliges " them only when the higher order does not con travene ? The documents in question bore the signatures of the Sees of Prague, Vienna, Munich, Cologne, Mainz ; those of Milan and Turin ; those of Paris, Rheims, Orleans, and the principal Sees of Portugal ; those of New York, Cincinnati, St. Louis, Halifax, and St. John ; those of Kerry and Dromore, and of Clifton ; and from ancient coun tries the signatures of Antioch, Babylon, Tyre, Sidon, and Seleucia. Not often in the history of manners have titles representing so many ancient claims and such considerable modern station been treated with equal discourtesy. The Univers of January 30 1 said that when the minority thought that the majority were about to come to a decisive vote, they sent Bishop Freppel, or some one else, to propose concUiation ; but when reassured, they began their opposi tion afresh. It further said that Cardinal Hohenlohe acted in Rome in the interests of his brother, the Minister, and that his theologian, Friedrich, who had been chosen by DoUinger, was the writer of the letters in the A ugsburg Gazette ; that Cardinal Hohenlohe, with Schwarzenberg and Haynald, had succeeded in making an impression at certain embassies ; and that the Austrian ambassador put the petition against infallibility before bishops, and asked if they had signed it. Not content with the far-reaching policy which aimed ulti mately at a cosmopolitan counter-revolution, the party of movement desired to begin forthwith by a local counter revolution. Italy was to be reconstituted as a confederation of four States — the Papal States, Naples, Tuscany, and Pied mont. This, cries Friedrich, is a new task for a CouncU,— a Council caUed to make a revolution ! 2 But the bishops knew more of the world than the Curia. Party spirit now ran high. Those who had adopted the tactics of opposing infaUibUity only on the ground of oppor tuneness, while they really objected on principle, found that they had gained nothing in point of conciliation, and had lost 1 Quoted Tagebuch, p. 155.' 2 Tagebuch, p. 155. PARTY SPIRIT 409 almost everything in point of moral power. How could ordinary consciences understand a man who admitted, or seemed to admit, that a doctrine, affecting the representative of God on earth, was true, and yet denied that it ought to be proclaimed ? Compared with this position, that of the Pope was bold sensible and Christian. " We must never fear to proclaim the truth or to condemn error." Many, as weU as Dupanloup, who first departed from the false line that he had seemed to mark out, found that they must object to the principle. Even if they had not previously studied the question at aU, the glaring attempts now made to palm off admissions of primacy for assertions of infaUibUity opened their eyes. An ex-Anglican like Manning might easily accept that or grosser faUacies, but others had been taught to dis tinguish. The party of movement, on the other hand, raised a cry for action, which sweUed higher at every sign of oppo sition. Their aUegations are briefly expressed by Sambin (p. 105) :— Pontifical infaUibUity is the sign to be spoken against. If it is defined, the question is near to its settlement. The Catholic social Liberalism of France, and the scientific Liberalism of Ger many, are indeed menaced. It is, therefore, a question of life or death for Liberalism, as for Gallicanism and Febronianism. The opposition to " the divine preogatives of the Pontiff," says this author,1 " had now become so pronounced that it was necessary to act." 2 Saviours of society always come to that point on the eve of the coup d'etat. M. VeuUlot, who had long endeavoured to smother the oppo sition by asserting that no opposition existed, now declared that the opposition was so grave that it made the proposed definition a necessity. Quirinus says that the Address in favour of infaUibUity owes its preponderance of signatures principaUy to the three hundred boarders and the South Americans, while the counter-address represents " the over whelming predominance in numbers of souls, in inteUigence, 1 Ibid. 2 P. 112. 410 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE and in national importance " (p. 173). One topic of constant complaint on the part of the Opposition was the dispro portionate number of bishops to people in Italy as compared with other nations. For the seven hundred thousand people then in the Papal States there were sixty-two bishops, whfle for the twelve miUion Catholics of Germany there were fourteen. One miUion seven hundred thousand in the diocese of Bres- lau had but a single prelate, and he was not placed on any committee whatever. The nine mUlions of ignorant and superstitious people in Naples and SicUy had no less than sixty-eight bishops. On the other side of this question, M. VeuiUot played off the name of London. If Paris and Vienna, Munich and Lyons, MUan and Turin, were on the wrong side, the Archbishop of London was on the right one. Spalding, Archbishop of Baltimore, issued a project for a decree which, without formaUy defining the dogma of infaUi bUity, should bind aU to an interior assent to the infaUibUity of Papal decrees in faith or morals. He pointed out the evils attendant on a formal definition, and that in a manner which afterwards enlivened the controversy between Dupanloup, Deschamps, and himself. The work wherewith Deschamps regaled his Christmas Day was that of proposing no less than ten anathemas ; J for if the Fathers could not propose things in Council, they could send a suggestion to the committee. Ten new anathemas dated expressly on the Nativity of our Lord by a Christian bishop ! That day Reisach died. 1 Martin's Collection, p. 91. CHAPTER VII Matters of Discipline — Remarks of Friedrich on the Morals of the Clergy — Also on the War against Modern Constitutions — -Morality of recent Jesuit Teaching — Darboy's Speech — Melcher's Speech — A Dinner Party of Fallibilists — One of InfallibUists — Gratry — Debate, on the Morals of the Clergy THE Draft Decrees on discipline now in the hands of the bishops affected their remaining rights. It had taken three hundred years to develop the practical effects of the legislation of Trent in curtaUing those rights. Paolo Sarpi may say that the prelates entered Trent as bishops and left it as parsons ; but it was long before new regulations had worn down old procedure so far that an Archbishop of Paris, for instance, could be treated in the manner in which we have seen Darboy treated. The bishops, however, now feared, says ViteUeschi, lest their office should be further mutUated. According to Friedrich (p. 88), when, at one of the first meetings of the German and Hungarian prelates, Strossmayer said that the matter before them was the resignation of their coUective rights and the centring of the whole in the hands of the Pope, he was ridiculed ; but when he repeated that state ment, on Saturday, January 8, it was received with universal assent. On the other hand, Roman ecclesiastics were alarmed at the pretensions of the bishops. Two Dominicans begged Cardinal Hohenlohe to use his influence to prevent the Germans from speaking as extravagantly as the French. "It is reaUy frightful," they said ; " what is to become of Rome ? These bishops want spiritual decentralization." Friedrich now thinks that he begins to see what is the religious principle of the Roman clergy — domination, as a means of existence. The bearing of this remark on spiritual decentralization rests 412 THE POPE, THE KINGS, AND THE PEOPLE on the fact that spiritual causes referred to Rome bring money to the bureaux, and the bureaucracy are the clergy. The professional observations of Friedrich on the Drafts touching discipline give insight into certain interior aspects of Romanism, which affect not only its own condition, but, through it, affect all society. We therefore let him speak directly (p. 89 ff.)— The first chapter on the Office of a Bishop closes so abruptly that only at the end is it said that bishops must be examples for the flock. It is, however, praiseworthy that they are told to take the lead of the faithful even in knowledge. Alas for this pious wish ! It will be as it has been ! Further on, the words " let ecclesiastical discipline be maintained " strike the eye, and that in respect ofthe mulieres subintroductce, or